 Section 39 of Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 3. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Dave Whitman. Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 3 by John Calvin. Translated by Henry Beverage. Chapter 21 of The Eternal Election, by which God has predestinated some to salvation and others to destruction. The divisions of this chapter are 1. The necessity and utility of the doctrine of eternal election explained. Excessive curiosity restrained. Sections 1 and 2. 2. Explanation to those who through false modesty shun the doctrine of predestination. Sections 3 and 4. 3. The orthodox doctrine expounded. Sections. Section 1. The doctrine of election and predestination. It is useful, necessary and most sweet. Ignorance of it impairs the glory of God, plucks up humility by the roots, begets and fosters pride. The doctrine establishes the certainty of salvation, peace of conscience and the true origin of the church. Answer to two classes of men. 1. The curious. Section 2. A sentiment of Augustine, confirmed by an admonition of our Saviour and a passage of Solomon. Section 3. An answer to a second class, vis those who are unwilling that the doctrine should be adverted to. An objection founded on a passage of Solomon, solved by the words of Moses. Section 4. A second objection, vis that this doctrine is a stumbling block to the profane. Answer. 1. The same may be said of many other heads of doctrine. 2. The truth of God will always defend itself. Third objection, vis that this doctrine is dangerous even to believers. Answer. 1. The same objection made to Augustine. 2. We must not despise anything that God has revealed, arrogance and blasphemy of such objections. Section 5. Certain cavals against the doctrine. 1. Prescience regarded as the cause of predestination. 2. Prescience and predestination explained. Not prescience, but the good pleasure of God, the cause of predestination. This apparent from the gratuitous election of the posterity of Abraham and the rejection of all others. Section 6. Even of the posterity of Abraham, some elected and others rejected by special grace. Section 7. The apostle shows that the same thing has been done in regard to individuals under the Christian dispensation. Section 1. The covenant of life is not preached equally to all and among those to whom it is preached does not always meet with the same reception. This diversity displays the unsearchable depth of the divine judgment and is without doubt subordinate to God's purpose of eternal election. But if it is plainly owing to the mere pleasure of God that salvation is spontaneously offered to some while others have no access to it, great and difficult questions immediately arise entertained concerning election and predestination. Many, this seems a perplexing subject because they deem it most incongruous that of the great body of mankind, some should be predestined to salvation and others to destruction. How ceaselessly they entangle themselves will appear as we proceed. We may add that in the very obscurity which deters them, we may see not only the utility of this doctrine, but also its most pleasant fruits. We shall never feel persuaded as we ought that our salvation flows from the free mercy of God as its fountain until we are made acquainted with his eternal election. The grace of God being illustrated by the contrast vis that he does not adopt all promiscuously to the hope of salvation but gives to some what he denies to others. It is plain how greatly ignorance of this principle detracts from the glory of God and impairs true humility. But though thus necessary to be known, Paul declares that it cannot be known unless God, throwing works entirely out of view, elect those whom he has predestined. His words are, Even so then, at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace, and if by grace then it is no more of works, otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace, otherwise work is no more work. Romans 11.6 If to make it appear that our salvation flows entirely from the good mercy of God, we must be carried back to the origin of election, then those who would extinguish it, wickedly, do as much as in them lies to obscure what they ought most loudly to extol and pluck up humility by the very roots. Paul clearly declares that it is only when the salvation of a remnant is ascribed to gratuitous election we arrive at the knowledge that God saves whom he wills of his mere good pleasure, and does not pay a debt, a debt which can never be due. Those who preclude access and would not have anyone to obtain a taste of this doctrine are equally unjust to God and men. There being no other means of humbling us as we ought, or making us feel how much we are bound to him, nor indeed have we elsewhere any sure ground of confidence. This we say on the authority of Christ, who to deliver us from all fear and render us invincible amid our many dangers, snares and mortal conflicts, promises safety to all that the Father has taken under his protection. John 10.26 From this we infer that all who do not know that they are the peculiar people of God must be wretched from perpetual trepidation, and that those therefore who by overlooking the three advantages which we have noted would destroy the very foundation of our safety, consult ill for themselves and for all the faithful. What? Do we not here find the very origin of the church, which as Bernard rightly teaches, could not be found or recognized among the creatures because it lies hid, in both cases wondrously, within the lap of blessed predestination, and the mass of wretched condemnation. But before I enter on the subject, I have some remarks to address to two classes of men. The subject of predestination, which in itself is attended with considerable difficulty, is rendered very perplexed and hence perilous by human curiosity, which cannot be restrained from wandering into forbidden paths and climbing to the clouds, determined, if it can, that none of the secret things of God shall remain unexplored. When we see many, some of them, in other respects, not bad men, everywhere rushing into this audacity and wickedness, it is necessary to remind them of the course of duty in this matter. First then, when they inquire into predestination, let them remember that they are penetrating into the recesses of the divine wisdom, where he who rushes forward securely and confidently, instead of satisfying his curiosity, will enter an inextricable labyrinth. For it is not right that man should with impunity pry into things which the Lord has been pleased to conceal within himself and scan that sublime eternal wisdom, which it is his pleasure that we should not apprehend but adore, that therein also his perfections may appear. Those secrets of his will which he has seen it meet to manifest are revealed in his word, revealed insofar as he knew to be conducive to our interest and welfare. Section 2. We have come into the way of faith, says Augustine. Let us constantly adhere to it. It leads to the chambers of the king, in which are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. For our Lord Jesus Christ did not speak invidiously to his great and most select disciples when he said, I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. We must walk, advance, increase, that our hearts may be able to comprehend these things which they cannot now comprehend. But if the last day shall find us making progress, we shall there learn what here we could not. If we give due weight to the consideration that the word of the Lord is the only way which can conduct us to the investigation of whatever it is lawful for us to hold with regard to him, is the only light which can enable us to discern what we ought to see with regard to him, it will curb and restrain all presumption. For it will show us that the moment we go beyond the bounds of the word, we are out of the course, in darkness, and must every now and then stumble, go astray and fall. Let it therefore be our first principle that to desire any other knowledge of predestination than that which is expounded by the word of God is no less infatuated than to walk where there is no path or to seek light in the darkness. Let us not be ashamed to be ignorant in a matter in which ignorance is learning. Rather, let us willingly abstain from the search after knowledge to which it is both foolish perilous and even fatal to aspire. If an unrestrained imagination urges us, our proper course is to oppose it with these words. It is not good to eat much honey, so for men to search their own glory is not glory. Proverbs 25, 27. There is good reason to dread a presumption which can only plunge us headlong into ruin. Section 3. There are others who when they would cure this disease recommend that the subject of predestination should scarcely if ever be mentioned and tell us to shun every question concerning it as we would a rock. Although their moderation is justly commendable in thinking that such mysteries should be treated with moderation, yet because they keep too far within the proper measure they have little influence over the human mind which does not readily allow itself to be curbed. Therefore in order to keep the legitimate course in this matter we must return to the Word of God in which we are furnished with the right rule of understanding. For Scripture is the school of the Holy Spirit in which as nothing useful and necessary to be known has been omitted so nothing is taught but what is of importance to know. Everything therefore delivered in Scripture on the subject of predestination we must beware of keeping from the faithful lest we seem either maliciously to deprive them of the blessing of God or to accuse and scoff at the Spirit as having divulged what ought on any account to be suppressed. Let us, I say, allow the Christian to unlock his mind and ears to all the words of God which are addressed to him provided he do it with this moderation, viz that whenever the Lord shuts his sacred mouth he also desists from inquiry. The best rule of sobriety is not only in learning to follow wherever God leads but also when he makes an end of teaching to cease also from wishing to be wise. The danger which they dread is not so great that we ought on account of it to turn away our minds from the oracles of God. There is a celebrated saying of Solomon, it is the glory of God to conceal a thing. Proverbs 25 verse 2. But since both piety and common sense dictate that this is not to be understood of everything we must look for a distinction, lest under the pretense of modesty and sobriety we be satisfied with a brutish ignorance. This is clearly expressed by Moses in a few words. The secret things belong unto the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever. Deuteronomy 29 verse 29. We see how he exhorts the people to study the doctrine of the law in accordance with a heavenly decree because God has been pleased to promulgate it while he at the same time confines them within these boundaries for the simple reason that it is not lawful for men to pry into the secret things of God. Section 4. I admit that profane men lay hold of the subject of predestination to carp or caval or snarl or scoff. But if their petulance frightens us it will be necessary to conceal all the principal articles of faith because they and their fellows leave scarcely one of them unassailed with blasphemy. A rebellious spirit will display itself no less insolently when it hears that there are three persons in the Divine Essence than when it hears that God when he created man foresaw everything that was to happen to him. Nor will they abstain from their jeers when told that little more than 5,000 years have elapsed since the creation of the world for they will ask why did the power of God slumber so long in idleness? In short nothing can be stated that they will not assail with derision. To quell their blasphemies must we say nothing concerning the divinity of the Son and the Spirit? Must the creation of the world be passed over in silence? No, the truth of God is too powerful both here and everywhere to dread the slanders of the ungodly. As Augustine powerfully maintains in his treatise the Bono Preservante for we see that the false apostles were unable by defaming and accusing the true doctrine of Paul to make him ashamed of it. There is nothing in the allegation that the whole subject is fraught with danger to pious minds as tending to destroy exhortation, shake faith, disturb and dispirit the heart. Augustine disguises not that on these grounds he was often charged with preaching the doctrine of predestination too freely but as it was easy for him to do he abundantly refutes the charge. As a great variety of absurd objections are here stated we have thought it best to dispose of each one of them in its proper place. Only I wish it to be received as a general rule that the secret things of God are not to be scrutinized and that those which he has revealed are not to be overlooked lest we may on the one hand be chargeable with curiosity and on the other with ingratitude for it has been shrewdly observed by Augustine that we can safely follow scripture which walked softly as with a mother's step in accommodation to our weaknesses. Those however who are so cautious and timid that they would bury all mention of predestination in order that it may not trouble weak minds with what color prey will they cloak their arrogance when they indirectly charge God with a want of due consideration in not having foreseen a danger for which they imagine they prudently provide. Whoever therefore throws obliquely on the doctrine of predestination openly brings a charge against God as having inconsiderately allowed something to escape from him which is injurious to the church. The predestination by which God adopts some to the hope of life and adjudges others to eternal death no man who would be thought pious ventures simply to deny but it is greatly caveled at especially by those who make prescience its cause we indeed ascribe both prescience and predestination to God but we say that it is absurd to make the latter subordinate to the former When we attribute prescience to God we mean that all things always were and ever continue under his eye that to his knowledge there is no past or future but all things are present and indeed so present that it is not merely the idea of them that is before him as those objects are which we retain in our memory but that he truly sees and contemplates them as actually under his immediate inspection this prescience extends to the whole circuit of the world and to all creatures by predestination we mean the eternal decree of God by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man all are not created on equal terms but some are preordained to eternal life others to eternal damnation and accordingly as each has been created for one or other of those ends we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death this God has testified not only in the case of single individuals he has also given a specimen of it in the whole posterity of Abraham to make it plain that the future condition of each nation lives entirely at his disposal when the most high divided to the nations their inheritance when he separated the sons of Adam he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel for the Lord's portion is his people Jacob is the lot of his inheritance Deuteronomy chapter 32 verses 8 and 9 the separation is before the eyes of all in the person of Abraham as in a withered stock one people is specially chosen while the others are rejected but the cause does not appear except that Moses to deprive posterity of any handle for glorying tells them that their superiority was owing entirely to the free love of God the cause of which he assigns for their deliverance is because he loved thy fathers therefore he chose their seed after them Deuteronomy 4 verse 37 or more explicitly in another chapter the Lord did not set his love upon you he chose you because you were more in number than any people for ye were the fewest of all people but because the Lord loved you Deuteronomy 7 verses 7 and 8 he repeatedly makes the same intimations behold the heaven and the heaven of heavens is the Lord's thy God the earth also with all that therein is only the Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love them and he chose their seed after them Deuteronomy 10 verses 14 and 15 again in another passage holiness is enjoined upon them because they have been chosen to be a peculiar people while in another love is declared to be the cause of their protection Deuteronomy 23 verse 5 this too believe us with one voice proclaim he shall choose our inheritance for us the excellency of Jacob whom he loved Psalm 47 verse 4 the endowments with which God has adorned them they all ascribed to gratuitous love not only because they knew that they had not obtained them by any merit but that not even was the holy patriarch endued with a virtue that could procure such distinguished honour for himself and his posterity and the more completely to crush all pride he up braids them with having merited nothing of the kind seeing they were a rebellious and stiff-necked people Deuteronomy 9 verse 6 often also do the prophets remind the Jews of this election by way of disparagement and appropriation because they had shamefully revolted from it be this as it may let those who would ascribe the election of God to human worth or merit come forward when they see that one nation is preferred to all others when they hear that it was no feeling of respect that induced God to show more favour to a small and ignoble body nay even to the wicked and rebellious will they plead against him for having chosen to give such a manifestation of mercy but neither will their obstreperous words hinder his work nor will their invectives like stones thrown against heaven strike or hurt his righteousness nay rather they will fall back on their own heads to this principle of a free covenant moreover the Israelites are recalled whenever thanks are to be returned to God or the hopes of the future to be animated the Lord his God says the psalmist it is he that has made us and not we ourselves we are his people and the sheep of his pasture Psalm 100 verse 3 Psalm 95 verse 7 the negation which is added not we ourselves is not superfluous to teach us that God is not only the author of all the good qualities in which men excel but that they originate in himself there being nothing in them worthy of so much honour in the following words also they are enjoying to rest satisfied with the mere good pleasure of God O ye seed of Abraham his servant ye children of Jacob his chosen Psalm 105 verse 6 and after an immuneration of the continual mercies of God as fruits of election the conclusion is that he acted thus kindly because he remembered his covenant with this doctrine accords the song of the whole church they got not the land in possession by their own sword neither did their own arm save them but by thy right hand and thine arm and the light of thy countenance because thou hadst a favour unto them Psalm 44 verse 3 it is to be observed that when the land is mentioned the visible symbol of the secret election in which adoption is comprehended to like gratitude David elsewhere exhorts the people blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord and the people whom he has chosen for his own inheritance Psalm 33 verse 12 Samuel thus animates their hopes the Lord will not forsake his people for his great name's sake because it has pleased the Lord to make you his people 1 Samuel 12 verse 22 and when David's faith is assailed how does he arm himself for the battle blessed is the man whom thou choosest and causes to approach unto thee that he may dwell in thy courts Psalm 65 verse 4 but as the hidden election of God was confirmed both by a first and second election and by other intermediate mercies Isaiah thus applies the terms the Lord will have mercy on Jacob and will yet choose Israel Isaiah 14 verse 1 referring to a future period the gathering together of the dispersion who seem to have been abandoned he says that it will be a sign of a firm and stable election not withstanding of the apparent abandonment and when it is elsewhere said I have chosen thee and not cast thee away Isaiah 41 verse 9 the continual course of his great liberality is ascribed to paternal kindless this is stated more explicitly in Zechariah by the angel the Lord shall choose Jerusalem again as if the severity of his chastisements had amounted to reprobation or the captivity had been an interruption of election which however remains inviolable though the signs of it do not always appear section 6 we must add a second step of a more limited nature or one in which the grace of God was displayed in a more special form when of the same family of Abraham God rejected some and by keeping others within his church showed that he had retained them among his sons at first Ishmael had obtained the same rank with his brother Isaac because the spiritual covenant was equally sealed in him by the symbol of circumcision he is first cut off then Esau at last an innumerable multitude almost the whole of Israel in Isaac was the seed called the same calling held good in the case of Jacob God gave a similar example in the rejection of Saul this is also celebrated in the psalm moreover he refused the tabernacle of Joseph and chose not the tribe of Ephraim but chose the tribe of Judah psalm 78 verses 67 and 68 this the sacred history sometimes repeats that the secret grace of God may be more admirably displayed in that change I admit that it was by their own fault Ishmael, Esau and others fell from their adoption for the condition annexed was that they should faithfully keep the covenant of God whereas they perfidiously violated it the singular kindness of God consisted in this that he had been pleased to prefer them to other nations as I said in the psalm he has not dealt so with any nation and as for his judgments they have not known them psalm 147 verse 20 but I had good reason for saying that two steps are here to be observed for in the election of the whole nation God had already shown that in the exercise of his mere liberality he was under no law but was free so that he was by no means to be restricted to an equal division of grace it's very inequality proving it to be gratuitous accordingly Malachi enlarges on the ingratitude of Israel in that being not only selected from the whole human race but set peculiarly apart from a sacred household they perfidiously and impiously spurn God their beneficent parent was not Esau Jacob's brother saith the Lord yet I love Jacob and I hated Esau Malachi chapter 1 verses 2 and 3 for God takes it for granted that as both were the sons of a holy father and successors of the covenant in short branches from a sacred root the sons of Jacob were under no ordinary obligation for having been admitted to that dignity but when by the rejection of Esau the firstborn their progenitor though inferior in birth was made heir he charges them with double ingratitude in not being restrained by a double tie section 7 although it is now sufficiently plain that God by his secret counsel chooses whom he will while he rejects others his gratuitous election has only been partially explained until we come to the case of single individuals to whom God not only offers salvation but so assigns it that the certainty of the result remains not dubious or suspended these are considered as belonging to that one seed of which Paul makes mention Romans 9 verse 8 Galatians 3 verse 16 etc. for although adoption was deposited in the hand of Abraham yet as many of his posterity were cut off as rotten members in order that election may stand and be effectual it is necessary to ascend to the head in whom the heavenly father has connected his elect with each other and bound them to himself by an indissoluble tie thus in the adoption of the family of Abraham God gave them a liberal display of favor which he has denied to others but in the members of Christ there is a far more excellent display because those engrafted into him as their head never fail to obtain salvation hence Paul skillfully argues from the passage of Malachi which I quoted Romans 9 verse 13 Malachi 1 verse 2 that when God after making a covenant of eternal life invites any people to himself a special mode of election is in part understood so that he does not with promiscuous grace effectually elect all of them the words Jacob I have loved refer to the whole progeny of the patriarch which the prophet there opposes to the posterity of Esau but there is nothing in this repugnant to the fact that in the person of one man is set before us a specimen of election which cannot fail of accomplishing its object it is not without cause that Paul observes that these are called a remnant Romans 9 verse 27 11 verse 5 because experience shows that of the general body many fall away and are lost so that often a small portion only remains the reason why the general election of people is not always firmly ratified readily presents itself vis that on those with whom God is covenant he does not immediately bestow the spirit of regeneration by whose power they persevere in the covenant even to the end the external invitation without the internal efficacy of grace which would have the effect of retaining them holds a kind of middle place between the rejection of the human race and the election of a small number of believers the whole people of Israel are called the Lord's inheritance and many foreigners among them still because the covenant which God had made to be their father and redeemer was not altogether null he has respect to that free favor rather than to the perfidious defection of many even by them his truth was not abolished since by preserving some residue to himself it appeared that his calling was without repentance when God ever and his church from among the sons of Abraham rather than from profane nations he had respect to his covenant which when violated by the great body he restricted to a few that it might not entirely fail in short that common adoption of the seed of Abraham was a kind of visible image of a greater benefit which God deigned to bestow on some out of many this is the reason why Paul so carefully distinguishes between the sons of Abraham according to the flesh and the spiritual sons who are called after the example of Isaac not that simply to be a son of Abraham was a vain or useless privilege this could not be said without insult to the covenant but that the immutable council of God by which he predestinated to himself whom so ever he would was alone effectual for their salvation the proper view is made clear by the production of passages of scripture I advise my readers not to pre-dudge the question we say then that scripture clearly proves this much that God by his eternal and immutable council determined once for all those whom it was his pleasure one day to admit to salvation and those whom on the other hand it was his pleasure to doom to destruction we say then that this council as regards the elect is founded on his free mercy without any respect to human worth while those whom he dooms to destruction are excluded from access to life by a just and blameless but at the same time incomprehensible judgment in regard to the elect we regard calling as the evidence of election and justification as another symbol of its manifestation as fully accomplished by the attaining of glory but as the Lord seals his elect by calling and justification so by excluding the reprobate either from the knowledge of his name or the sanctification of his spirit he by these marks in a manner discloses the judgment which awaits them I will here admit many of the fictions which foolish men have devised to overthrow predestination there is no need of refuting objections at the moment they are produced abundantly betray their hollowness I will dwell only on those points which either form the subject of dispute among the learned or may occasion any difficulty to the simple or may be employed by impiety as specious pretexts for assailing the justice of God End of section 39 Recording by Dave Whitman Krasnayask, Siberia www www.witman.ru Section 40 of Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3 This is a LibriVox recording All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3 by John Calvin Translated by Henry Beverage Chapter 22 Part 1 This doctrine confirmed by proofs from Scripture The divisions of this chapter are 1. A confirmation of the Orthodox doctrine in opposition to two classes of individuals This confirmation founded on a careful exposition of our Saviour's words and passages in the Writings of Paul Sections 1-7 2. A refutation of some objections taken from ancient writers Thomas Aquinas and more modern writers Sections 8-10 3. A reprobation of the Church of God 3. A reprobation which is founded entirely on the righteous will of God Section 11 Sections 1 Some imagine that God elects or reprobates according to a foreknowledge of merit. Others make it a charge against God that he elects some and passes by others. Both refuted 1. By invincible arguments 2. By the testimony of Augustine 2. Who are elected when, in whom, to what reason? 3. The reason is the good pleasure of God, which so reigns in election that no works, either past or future are taken into consideration. This proved by notable declarations of one Saviour and passages of Paul 4. Proved by a striking discussion in the Epistles of the Romans, its scope and method explained. The advocates of foreknowledge refuted by the Apostle when he maintains that election is a special and holy practice. 5. Evasion refuted a summary and analysis of the Apostle's discussion. 6. An exception with three answers to it. The efficacy of gratuitous election extends only to believers who are said to be elected according to foreknowledge. This foreknowledge or prescience is not speculative but active. 7. This proved from the words of Christ. Conclusion of the answer and solution with regard to Judas. 8. An objection taken from the ancient Fathers. Answer from Augustine, from Ambrose, as quoted by Augustine, and an invincible argument by an Apostle. Summary of this argument. 9. Objection from Thomas Aquinas. Answer. 10. Objection of more modern writers. Answers. Passages in which there is a semblance of contradiction reconciled. Why many called and few chosen. An objection founded on mutual consent between the word and faith. Solution confirmed by the words of Paul, Augustine, and Bernard. A clear declaration by our Saviour. 11. The view to be taken of reprobation. It is founded on the righteous will of God. 1. Many controvert all the positions which we have laid down, especially the gratuitous election of believers which, however, cannot be overthrown. For they commonly imagine that God distinguishes between men according to the merits which he foresees that each individual is to have, giving the adoption of sons to those whom he foreknows will not be unworthy of his grace, and dooming those to destruction, whose dispositions he perceives will be prone to mischief and wickedness. Thus by interposing four knowledge as avail they not only obscure election but pretend to give it a different origin. Nor is this the commonly received opinion of the vulgar merely, for it has in all ages had great supporters, C. Section 8. This I candidly confess, lest anyone should expect greatly to prejudice our cause by opposing it with their names. The truth of God is here too certain to be shaken, too clear to be over-born by human authority. Others who are neither versed in Scripture nor entitled to any weight, assail sound doctrine with a petulance and improbity which it is impossible to tolerate. Because God of his mere good pleasure electing some passes by others they raise a plea against him. But if the fact is certain what can they gain by quarreling with God? We teach nothing but what experience proves to be true. Videlis said that God has always been at liberty to bestow his grace on whom he would. Not to ask in what respect the posterity of Abraham excelled others, if it be not in a worth the cause of which has no existence out of God, let them tell why men are better than oxen or asses. God might have made them dogs when he formed them in his own image. Will they allow the lower animals to expostulate with God as if the inferiority of their condition were unjust? It is certainly not more equitable that men should enjoy the privilege which they have not acquired by any merit than that he should variously distribute favors as seems to him meet. If they pass to the case of individuals where inequality is more offensive to them they ought at least in regard to the example of our Saviour to be restrained by feelings of awe from talking so confidently of this sublime mystery. He has conceived a mortal man of the seed of David. What, I would ask them, are the virtues by which he deserved to become in the very womb the head of angels the only begotten Son of God the image and glory of the Father the light, righteousness and salvation of the world? It is wisely observed by Augustine that in the very head of the church we have a bright mirror of free election lest it should give any trouble to us the members. Videlis said that he did not become the Son of God by living righteously but was freely presented with this great honour that he might afterwards make others partakers of his gifts. Should any one here ask why others are not what he was or why we are all at so great a distance from him why we are all corrupt while he has purity he would not only betray his madness but if they are bent on depriving God of the free right of electing and reprobating let them at the same time take away what has been given to Christ it will now be proper to attend to what scripture declares concerning each when Paul declares that we were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world Ephesians chapter 1 verse 4 he certainly shows that no regard is had to our own worth for it is just as if he had said since in the whole seed of Adam only father found nothing worthy of his election he turned his eye upon his own anointed that he might select as members of his body those whom he was to assume into the fellowship of life let believers then give full effect to this reason Videlis said that we were in Christ adopted unto the heavenly inheritance because in ourselves we were incapable of such excellence this he elsewhere observes in another passage in which he exhorts the Colossians to give thanks and meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints Colossians chapter 1 verse 12 if election precedes that divine grace by which we are made fit to obtain immortal life what can God find in us to induce him to elect us what I mean is still more clearly explained in another passage God says he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world that we might be holy and without blame before him in love that the proof may be more complete it is of importance to attend to the separate clauses of that passage when they are connected together they leave no doubt from giving them the name of elect it is clear that he is addressing believers as indeed he should and that he should and that he should and that he should and that he should and that he should and that he should that he is addressing believers as indeed he shortly after declares it is therefore a complete perversion of the name to confine it to the age in which the gospel was published by saying that they were elected before the foundation of the world he takes away all reference to今天的 for what ground of distinction was there so as if existed not and persons that were afterwards like them to exist in Adam but if they were elected in Christ follows not only that each was elected on some extrinsic ground but that some were placed on a different footing from others, since we see that all are not members of Christ. In the additional statement that they were elected that they might be holy, the apostle openly refutes the error of those who deduce election from prescience, since he declares that whatever virtue appears in men is the result of election. Then, if a higher cause is asked, Paul answers that God's so predestined, and predestined according to the good pleasure of his will. By these words he overturns all the grounds of election which men imagine to exist in themselves, for he shows that whatever favors God bestows in reference to the spiritual life flow from this one fountain, because God chose whom he would, and before they were born had the grace which he designed to bestow upon them set apart for their use. 3. Wherever this good pleasure of God reigns, no good works are taken into account. The apostle indeed does not follow out the antithesis, but is to be understood, as he himself explains it in another passage, who has called us with a holy calling not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. 2 Timothy 1.9 We have already shown that the additional words that we might be holy remove every doubt. If you say that he foresaw they would be holy, and therefore elected them, you invert the order of Paul. You may therefore safely infer, if he elected us that we might be holy, he did not elect us because he foresaw that we would be holy. The two things are evidently inconsistent. Videlis said that the pious owe it to election that they are holy, and yet attain to election by means of works. There is no force in the cavel to which they are ever occurring, that the Lord does not bestow election in recompense of proceeding, but bestows it in consideration of future merits. For when it is said that believers were elected that they might be holy, it is at the same time intimated that the holiness which was to be in them has its origin in election. And how can it be consistently said that things derived from election are the cause of election? The very thing which the apostle had said, he seems afterwards to confirm by adding, to his good pleasure which he has purposed in himself. Ephesians chapter 1 verse 9, for the expression that God purposed in himself is the same as if it had been said that in forming his decree he considered nothing external to himself. And accordingly it is immediately subjoined that the whole object contemplated in our election is that we should be to the praise of his glory. Assuredly divine grace would not deserve all the praise of election were not election gratuitous, and it would not be gratuitous did God in electing any individual pay regard to his future works. Hence what Christ said to his disciples is found to be universally applicable to all believers. Ye have not chosen me but I have chosen you. John chapter 15 verse 16. Here he not only excludes past merits but declares that they had nothing in themselves for which they could be chosen except in so far as his mercy anticipated. And how are we to understand the words of Paul who has first given to him and it shall be recompensed unto him again? Romans chapter 11 verse 35. His meaning obviously is that men are altogether indebted to the preventing goodness of God, there being nothing in them either past or future to conciliate his favour. In the epistle to the Romans, Romans chapter 9 verse 6, in which he again treats this subject more reckondightly and at greater length, he declares that they are not all Israel which are of Israel, for though all were blessed in respect of hereditary rights, yet all did not equally obtain the succession. The whole discussion was occasioned by the pride and vanglorying of the Jews who by claiming the name of the church for themselves would have made the faith of the gospel dependent on their pleasure, just as in the present day the Papists would feign under this pretext substitute themselves in place of God. Paul, while he concedes that in respect of the Covenant they were the holy offspring of Abraham, yet contends that the greater part of them were strangers to it, and that not only because they were degenerate and so had become bastards instead of sons, but because the principal point to be considered was the special election of God, by which alone his adoption was ratified. If the piety of some established them in the hope of salvation, and the revolt of others was the sole cause of their being rejected, it would have been foolish and absurd in Paul to carry his readers back to a secret election. But if the will of God, no cause of which external to him either appears or is to be looked for, distinguishes some from others, so that all the sons of Israel are not true Israelites, it is vain for anyone to seek the origin of his condition in himself. He afterwards prosecutes the subject at greater length by contrasting the cases of Jacob and Esau. Both being sons of Abraham, both having been at the same time in the womb of their mother, there was something very strange in the change by which the honor of the birthright was transferred to Jacob, and yet Paul declares that the change was an attestation to the election of the one and the reprobation of the other. The question considered is the origin and cause of election. The advocates of foreknowledge insist that it is to be found in the virtues and vices of men, for they take the short and easy method of asserting that God showed in the person of Jacob that he elects those who are worthy of his grace, and in the person of Esau that he rejects those whom he foresees to be unworthy. Such is their confident assertion, but what does Paul say? For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works, but of him that calleth. It was said unto her, Rebecca, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Romans chapter 9 verses 11 to 13. If foreknowledge had anything to do with this distinction of the brothers, the mention of time would have been out of place. Saying that Jacob was elected for a worth to be obtained by future virtues, to what end did Paul say that he was not yet born? Nor would there have been any occasion for adding that as yet he had done no good, because the answer was always ready, that nothing is hid from God, and that therefore the piety of Jacob was present before him. If works procure favour, a value ought to have been put upon them before Jacob was born, just as if he had been of full age. But in explaining the difficulty the Apostle goes on to show that the adoption of Jacob proceeded not on works, but on the calling of God. In works he makes no mention of past or future, but distinctly opposes them to the calling of God, intimating that when place is given to the one, the other is overthrown. As if he had said, the only thing to be considered is what pleased God, not what men furnished of themselves. Lastly, it is certain that all the causes which men are want to devise as external to the secret counsel of God, are excluded by the use of the terms, purpose, and election. 5. Why should men attempt to darken these statements by assigning some place in election to past or future works? This is altogether to evade what the Apostle contends for. Videlis said that the distinction between the brothers is not found on any ground of works, but on the mere calling of God, in as much as it was fixed before the children were born. Had there been any solidity in this subtlety, it would not have escaped the notice of the Apostle. But being perfectly aware that God foresaw no good in man, save that which he had already previously determined to bestow by means of his election, he does not employ a preposterous arrangement which would make good works antecedent to their cause. We learn from the Apostle's words that the salvation of believers is founded entirely on the decree of divine election, that the privilege is procured not by works, but free calling. We have also a specimen of the thing itself set before us. Esau and Jacob are brothers, begotten of the same parents, within the same womb, not yet born. In them all things are equal, and yet the judgment of God with regard to them is different. He adopts the one and rejects the other. The only right of precedence was that of primogeniture, but that is disregarded and the younger is preferred to the elder. Nay, in the case of others, God seems to have disregarded primogeniture for the express purpose of excluding the flesh from all ground of boasting. Rejecting Ishmael, he gives his favor to Isaac. Postponing Manasseh, he honors Ephraim. 6. Should any one object that these minute and inferior favors do not enable us to decide with regard to the future life, that it is not to be supposed that he who received the honor of primogeniture was thereby adopted to the inheritance of heaven. Many objectors do not even spare Paul, but accuse him of having in the quotation of these passages rested scripture from its proper meaning. I answer as before that the apostle has not erred through in consideration or spontaneously misapplied the passages of scripture, but he saw, what these men cannot be brought to consider, that God purposed under an earthly sign to declare the spiritual election of Jacob, which otherwise lay hidden at his inaccessible tribunal. For unless we refer the primogeniture bestowed upon him to the future world, the form of blessing would be altogether vain and ridiculous, in as much as he gained nothing by it but a multitude of toils and annoyances, exile, sharp sorrows, and bitter cares. Therefore, when Paul knew beyond a doubt that by the external God manifested the spiritual and unfading blessings which he had prepared for his servant in his kingdom, he hesitated not in proving the latter to draw an argument from the former. For we must remember that the land of Canaan was given in pledge of the heavenly inheritance, and that therefore there cannot be a doubt that Jacob was like the angels engrafted into the body of Christ, that he might be a partaker of the same life. Jacob therefore is chosen while Esau is rejected. The predestination of God makes a distinction where none existed in respect of merit. If you ask the reason the apostle gives it, for he saith to Moses I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. Romans chapter 9 verse 15. And what prey does this mean? It is just a clear declaration by the Lord that he finds nothing in men themselves to induce him to show kindness, that it is owing entirely to his own mercy and accordingly that their salvation is his own work. Since God places your salvation in himself alone, why should you descend to yourself? Since he assigns you his own mercy alone, why will you recur to your own merits? Since he confines your thoughts to his own mercy, why do you turn partly to the view of your own works? We must therefore come to that smaller number whom Paul elsewhere describes as foreknown of God. Romans chapter 11 verse 2. Not foreknown as these men imagine by idle, inactive contemplations, but in the sense which it often bears. For surely when Peter says that Christ was delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, acts chapter 2 verse 23, he does not represent God as contemplating merely, but as actually accomplishing our salvation. Thus also Peter, in saying that the believers to whom he writes are elect according to the foreknowledge of God, first Peter chapter 1 verse 2, properly expresses that secret predestination by which God has sealed those whom he has been pleased to adopt as sons. And using the term purpose as synonymous with the term which uniformly denotes what is called a fixed determination, he undoubtedly shows that God, in being the author of our salvation, does not go beyond himself. In this sense he says in the same chapters that Christ as a lamb was foreordained before the creation of the world. First Peter chapter 1 verses 19 and 20. What could have been more frigid or absurd than to have represented God as looking from the height of heaven to see whence the salvation of the human race was to come? By a people foreknown, Peter means the same thing as Paul does. By a remnant selected from a multitude falsely assuming the name of God. In another passage to suppress the vain boasting of those who, while only covered with a mask, claim for themselves in the view of the world a first place among the godly, Paul says, the Lord knoweth them that are his. Chapter 2 verse 19. In short, by that term he designates two classes of people, the one consisting of the whole race of Abraham, the other a people separated from that race, and though hidden from human view, yet open to the eye of God. And there is no doubt that he took the passage from Moses who declared that God would be merciful to whomever he pleased, although he was speaking of an elect people whose condition was apparently equal. Just as if he had said that in a common adoption was included a special grace which he bestows on some as a holier treasure, and that there is nothing in the common covenant to prevent this number from being exempted from the common order. God being pleased in this matter to act as a free dispenser and disposer distinctly declares that the only ground on which he will show mercy to one rather than to another is his sovereign pleasure. For when mercy is bestowed on him who asks it, though he indeed does not suffer a refusal, he, however, either anticipates or partly acquires a favour, the whole merit of which God claims for himself. CHAPTER 22 PART II Now let the Supreme Judge and Master decide on the whole case. Seeing such obduracy in his hearers that his words fell upon the multitude almost without fruit, he, to remove this stumbling block, exclaims, All that the Father giveth me shall come to me. And this is the Father's will which has sent me, that of all he has given me I should lose nothing. CHAPTER VI. Observe that the donation of the Father is the first step in our delivery into the charge and protection of Christ. Some one, perhaps, will hear, churn round and object, that those only peculiarly belong to the Father who make a voluntary surrender by faith. But the only thing which Christ maintains, is that though the defections of vast multitudes should shake the world, yet the Council of God would stand firm, more stable than heaven itself, that his election would never fail. The elect are said to have belonged to the Father before he bestowed them on his only begotten Son. It is asked if they were his by nature. Nay, they were aliens, but he makes them his by delivering them. The words of Christ are too clear to be rendered obscure by any of the mists of Kaviling. No man can come to me except the Father which has sent me draw him. Every man therefore that has heard and learned of the Father comes unto me. John chapter 6 verses 44 and 45. Did all promiscuously bend the knee to Christ, election would be common, whereas now in the small number of believers a manifest diversity appears. Accordingly, our Saviour, shortly after declaring that the disciples who were given to him were the common property of the Father, adds, I pray not for the world, but for them which thou has given me, for they are thine. John chapter 17 verse 9. Hence it is that the whole world no longer belongs to its creator, except insofar as grace rescues from malediction, divine wrath, and eternal death. Some, not many, who would otherwise perish, while he leaves the world to the destruction to which it is doomed. Meanwhile, though Christ interposed as a mediator, yet he claims the right of electing in common with the Father. I speak not of you all, I know whom I have chosen. John chapter 13 verse 18. If it is asked whence he has chosen them, he answers in another passage out of the world, which he excludes from his prayers when he commits his disciples to the Father. John chapter 15 verse 19. We must indeed hold when he affirms that he knows whom he has chosen, first that some individuals of the human race are denoted, and secondly that they are not distinguished by the quality of their virtues but by a heavenly decree. Hence it follows that since Christ makes himself the author of election, none excel by their own strength or industry. In elsewhere, numbering Judas among the elect, though he was a devil, John chapter 6 verse 70, he refers only to the apostolic office, which, though a bright manifestation of divine favour, as Paul so often acknowledges it to be in his own person, does not however contain within itself the hope of eternal salvation. Judas therefore, when he discharged the office of apostle perfidiously, might have been worse than a devil, but not one of those whom Christ had once engrafted into his body will he ever permit to perish. For in securing their salvation he will perform what he has promised. That is, exert a divine power greater than all. John chapter 10 verse 28 For when he says, Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition. John chapter 17 verse 12 The expression, though there is a catechrisis in it, is not at all ambiguous. The sum is, that God, by gratuitous adoption, forms those whom he wishes to have for sons, but that the intrinsic cause is in himself, because he is contented with his secret pleasure. But Ambrose, Origen, and Jerome were of opinion that God dispenses his grace among men according to the use which he foresees that each will make of it. It may be added that Augustine also was for some time of this opinion, but after he had made greater progress in the knowledge of Scripture, he not only retracted it as evidently false, but powerfully confuted it. Nay, even after the retraction, glancing at the Pallagians who still persisted in that error, he says, Who does not wonder that the apostle failed to make this most acute observation, for after stating a most startling proposition concerning those who were not yet born, and afterwards putting the question to himself by way of objection, what then, is there unrighteousness with God? He had an opportunity of answering, that God foresaw the merits of both. He does not say so, but has recourse to the justice and mercy of God. And in another passage, after excluding all merit before election, he says, Here certainly, there is no place for the vain argument of those who defend the foreknowledge of God against the grace of God, and accordingly, maintain that we were elected before the foundation of the world, because God foreknew that we would be good, not that he himself would make us good. This is not the language of him who says, Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, John chapter 15 verse 16. For had he chosen us because he foreknew that we would be good, he would at the same time also have foreknown that we were to choose him. Let the testimony of Augustine prevail with those who willingly acquiesce in the authority of the fathers. Although Augustine allows not that he differs from the others, he shows by clear evidence that the difference to which the Pelagians invidiously objected to him is unfounded. For he quotes from Ambrose, Christ calls whom he pities. Again, had he pleased, he could have made them devout instead of undevout, but God calls whom he deigns to call, and makes religious whom he will. Were we disposed to frame an entire volume out of Augustine, it were easy to show the reader that I have no occasion to use any other words than his, but I am unwilling to burden him with a Prolex statement. But assuming that the fathers did not speak thus let us attend to the thing itself. A difficult question has been raised. David Ellis said, Did God do justly in bestowing his grace on certain individuals? Paul might have disencumbered himself of this question at once by saying that God had respect to works. Why does he not do so? Why does he rather continue to use a language which leaves him exposed to the same difficulty? Why? But just because it would not have been right to say it. There was no obliviousness on the part of the Holy Spirit who was speaking by his mouth. He therefore answers without ambiguity that God favours his elect because he is pleased to do so, and shows mercy because he is pleased to do so. For the words, I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and show mercy on whom I will show mercy—Exodus 33 verse 19—are the same in effect as if it had been said, God is moved to mercy by no other reason than that he is pleased to show mercy. Augustine's declaration therefore remains true. The grace of God does not find, but makes persons fit to be chosen. 9. Nor let us be detained by the subtlety of Thomas that the fore knowledge of merit is the cause of predestination, not indeed in respect of the predestinating act, but that on our part it may in some sense be so called, namely in respect of a particular estimate of predestination, as when it is said that God predestinates man to glory according to his merit, in as much as he decreed to bestow upon him the grace by which he merits glory. For while the Lord would have us to see nothing more in election than his mere goodness, for anyone to desire to see more is preposterous affectation. But were we to make a trial of subtlety, it would not be difficult to refute the sophistry of Thomas. He maintains that the elect are in a manner predestinated to glory on account of their merits, because God predestines to give them the grace by which they merit glory. What if I should, on the contrary, object that predestination to grace is subservient to election unto life, and follows as its handmade, that grace is predestined to those to whom the possession of glory was previously assigned the Lord being pleased to bring his sons by election to justification? For it will hence follow that the predestination to glory is the cause of the predestination to grace and not the converse. But let us have done with these disputes as superfluous among those who think that there is enough of wisdom for them in the word of God. For it has been truly said by an old ecclesiastical writer, those who ascribe the election of God to merits are wise above what they ought to be. 10. Some object that God would be inconsistent with himself in inviting all without distinction while he elects only a few. Thus according to them the universality of the promise destroys the distinction of special grace. Some moderate men speak in this way not so much for the purpose of suppressing the truth as to get quit of puzzling questions and curb excessive curiosity. The intention is laudable, but the design is by no means to be approved, dissimulation being at no time excusable. In those again who display their petulance we see only a vile cavill or a disgraceful error, the mode in which Scripture reconciles the two things, Videlis said, that by external preaching all are called to faith and repentance, and that yet the spirit of faith and repentance is not given to all I have already explained and will again shortly repeat. But the point which they assume I deny as false in two respects, for he who threatens that when it shall reign on one city there will be drought in another. CHAPTER 4 VIRST 7 And declares in another passage that there will be a famine of the word. AMUS CHAPTER 8 VIRST 11 Does not lay himself under a fixed obligation to call all equally. And he who, forbidding Paul to preach in Asian and leading him away from Bethenia, carries him over to Macedonia, acts CHAPTER 16 VIRST 6, shows that it belongs to him to distribute the treasure in what way he pleases. But it is by Isaiah he more clearly demonstrates how he destines the promises of salvation specially to the elect. Isaiah 8 VIRST 16. For he declares that his disciples would consist of them only and not inscriminately of the whole human race. Whence it is evident that the doctrine of salvation which is said to be set apart for the sons of the church only, is abused when it is represented as effectually available to all? For the present let it suffice to observe that though the word of the gospel is addressed generally to all, yet the gift of faith is rare. Isaiah assigns the cause when he says that the arm of the Lord is not revealed to all, Isaiah chapter 53 verse 1. Had he said that the gospel is malignantly and perversely condemned because many obstinately refuse to hear, there might perhaps be some color for this universal call. It is not the purpose of the prophet, however, to extenuate the guilt of men, but when he states the source of their blindness to be that God deigns not to reveal his arm to them, he only reminds us that since faith is a special gift, it is in vain that external doctrine sounds in the ear. But I would faint know from these doctors whether it is mere preaching or faith that makes men sons of God. Certainly when it is said, as many as receive him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. John chapter 1 verse 12. A confused mass is not set before us, but a special order is assigned to believers who are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. But it is said there is a mutual agreement between faith and the word. There must be wherever there is faith. But it is no new thing for the seed to fall among thorns or in stony places, not only because the majority appear in fact to be rebellious against God, but because all are not gifted with eyes and ears. How then can it consistently be said that God calls when he knows that the call will not come? Let Augustine answer for me. Would you dispute with me? Wonder with me? And exclaim? Oh, the depth! Let us both agree and dread, lest we perish in error. Moreover, if election is, as Paul declares the parent of faith, I retort the argument and maintain that faith is not general, since election is special. For it is easily inferred from the series of causes and effects when Paul says that the Father has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ according as he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world. Ephesians 1.3-4 That these riches are not common to all because God has chosen only whom he would. And the reason why in another passage he commends the faith of the elect is to prevent anyone from supposing that he acquires faith of his own nature, since to God alone belongs the glory of freely illuminating those whom he had previously chosen. Titus 1.1 For it is well said by Bernard, his friend here apart when he says to them, Fear not, little flock, to you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom. Who are these? Those whom he foreknew and predestinated to be conformed to the image of his son. He has made known his great and secret counsel. The Lord knoweth them that are his, but that which was known to God was manifested to men. Nor indeed does he deign to give a participation in this great mystery to any but those whom he foreknew and predestinated to be his own. Shortly after he concludes, the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, from everlasting through predestination, to everlasting through glorification, the one knows no beginning, the other no end. But why cite Bernard as a witness when we hear from the lips of our master, not that any man has seen the Father save he which is of God? John 6.46 By these words he intimates that all who are not regenerated by God are amazed at the brightness of his countenance, and indeed faith is aptly conjoined with election provided it hold the second place. This order is clearly expressed by our Saviour in these words. This is the Father's will which has sent me, that of all which he had given me I should lose nothing. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which sees the Son and believes on him may have everlasting life. John 6.39-40 If he would have all to be saved he would appoint his son their guardian and would engraft them all into his body by the sacred bond of faith. It is now clear that faith is a singular pledge of paternal love treasured up for the sons whom he has adopted. Hence Christ elsewhere says that the sheep follow the shepherd because they know his voice, but that they will not follow a stranger because they know not the voices of strangers. John 10.4 But whence that distinction, unless that their ears have been divinely bored? For no man makes himself a sheep, but is formed by heavenly grace. And why does the Lord declare that our salvation will always be sure and certain, but just because it is guarded by the invincible power of God? John 10.29 Accordingly he concludes that unbelievers are not of his sheep. John 10.16 The reason is because they are not of the number of those who, as the Lord promised by Isaiah, were to be his disciples. Moreover, as the passages which I have quoted imply perseverance, they are also attestations to the inflexible constancy of election. John 11.11 We now come to the reprobate, to whom the apostle at the same time refers. Romans 9.13 For as Jacob, who has yet had merited nothing by good works, was assumed into favour. So Esau, while as yet unpolluted by any crime, is hated. If we turn our view to works we do injustice to the apostle, as if he had failed to see the very thing which is clear to us. Moreover there is complete proof of his not having seen it, since he expressly insists that when as yet they had done neither good nor evil the one was elected the other rejected, in order to prove that the foundation of divine predestination is not in works. After starting the objection is God in just. Instead of employing what would have been the surest and plainest defence of his justice, Videlis said that God had recompensed Esau according to his wickedness. He is contented with a different solution. Videlis said that the reprobate are expressly raised up in order that the glory of God may thereby be displayed. At last he concludes that God has mercy on whom he will have mercy and whom he will he hardeneth, Romans chapter 9 verse 18. You see how he refers both to the mere pleasure of God. Therefore, if we cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just that it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will. When God has said to visit in mercy or harden whom he will, men are reminded that they are not to seek for any cause beyond his will. End of section 41. Section 42 of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 3. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 3 by John Calvin, translated by Henry Beverage. Chapter 23 Part 1. Refutation of the Calumnies by which this doctrine is always unjustly assailed. This chapter consists of four parts, which refute the principal objections to this doctrine, and the various pleas and exceptions founded on these objections. These are preceded by a refutation of those who hold election but deny reprobation. Section 1. Then follows, one, a refutation of the first objection to the doctrine of reprobation and election. Sections 2 to 5. Two, an answer to the second objection. Sections 6 to 9. Three, a refutation of the third objection. Four, a refutation of the fourth objection, to which is added a useful and necessary caution. Sections 12 to 14. Sections 1. Error of those who deny reprobation. 1. Election opposed to reprobation. 2. Those who deny reprobation presumptuously plead with God, whose counsels even angels adore. 3. They murmur against God when disclosing his counsels by the apostle. Exception and answer. Passage of Augustine. 2. First objection. Vidae Lecette, that God is unjustly offended with those whom he dooms to destruction without their own dessert. First answer from the consideration of the divine will, the nature of this will, and how to be considered. 3. Second answer. God owes nothing to man. His hatred against those who are corrupted by sin is most just. The reprobate convinced in their own consciences of the just judgment of God. 4. Exception, Vidae Lecette, that the reprobate seemed to have been preordained to sin. Answer. Passage of the apostle vindicated from Calumny. 5. Answer, confirmed by the authority of Augustine. Illustration, passage of Augustine. 6. Objection, that God ought not to impute the sins rendered necessary by his predestination. First answer by ancient writers. This is not valid. Second answer, also defective. Third answer, proposed by Vala, well founded. 7. Objection, that God did not decree that Adam should perish by his fall, refuted by a variety of reasons. A noble passage of Augustine. 8. Objection, that the wicked perish by the permission not by the will of God. Answer. A pious exhortation. 9. Objection and answer. 10. Objection, that according to the doctrine of predestination, God is a respecter of persons. Answer. 11. Objection, that sinners are to be punished equally or the justice of God is unequal. Answer, confirmed by passages of Augustine. 12. Objection, that the doctrine of predestination produces overweening confidence and impiety. Different answers. 13. Another objection, depending on the former. Answer. The doctrine of predestination to be preached, not passed over in silence. 14. How it is to be preached and delivered to the people. Summary of the Orthodox doctrine of predestination from Augustine. One. The human mind, when it hears this doctrine, cannot restrain its petulance, but boils and rages as if aroused by the sound of a trumpet. Many professing a desire to defend the deity from an invidious charge, admit the doctrine of election, but deny that anyone is reprobated. This they do ignorantly and childishly, since there could be no election without its opposite, reprobation. God is said to set apart those whom he adopts to salvation. It were most absurd to say that he admits others fortuitously, or that they, by their industry, acquire what election alone confers on a few. Those therefore whom God passes by, he reprobates, and that for no other cause, but because he is pleased to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines to his children. Nor is it possible to tolerate the petulance of men in refusing to be restrained by the word of God in regard to his incomprehensible counsel, which even angels adore. We have already been told that hardening is not less under the immediate hand of God than mercy. Paul does not, after the example of those whom I have mentioned, labor anxiously to defend God by calling in the aid of falsehood. He only reminds us that it is unlawful for the creature to quarrel with its creator. Then how will those who refuse to admit that any are reprobated by God explain the following words of Christ? Every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted shall be rooted up. Matthew 1513. They are plainly told that all whom the heavenly Father has not been pleased to plant as sacred trees in his garden are doomed and devoted to destruction. If they deny that this is a sign of reprobation, there is nothing however clear that can be proved to them, but if they will still murmur, let us in soberness of faith rest contented with the admonition of Paul, that it can be no ground of complaint that God, willing to show his wrath and to make his power known, endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory. Romans 9, 22, 23. Let my readers observe that Paul, to cut off all handle for murmuring and detraction, attributes supreme sovereignty to the wrath and power of God, for it were unjust that those profound judgments, which transcend all our powers of discernment, should be subject to our calculation. It is frivolous in our opponents to reply that God does not altogether reject those whom in levity he tolerates, but remains in suspense with regards to them, if peradventure they may repent as if Paul were representing God as patiently waiting for the conversion of those whom he describes as fitted for destruction. For Augustine, rightly expounding this passage, says that where power is united to endurance, God does not permit, but rules. They add also that it is not without cause that the vessels of wrath are said to be fitted for destruction, and that God is said to have prepared the vessels of mercy because in this way, the praise of salvation is claimed for God, whereas the blame of perdition is thrown upon those who of their own accord bring it upon themselves. But we'll have to concede that by the different forms of expression Paul softens the harshness of the former clause. It by no means follows that he transfers the preparation for destruction to any other cause than to the secret counsel of God. This indeed is asserted in the preceding context where God is said to have raised up Pharaoh and to harden whom he will. Hence it follows that the hidden counsel of God is the cause of hardening. I at least hold with Augustine that when God makes sheep out of wolves, he forms them again by the powerful influence of grace, that their hardness may thus be subdued and that he does not convert the obstinate because he does not exert that more powerful grace, a grace which he has at command if he were disposed to use it. Two, these observations would be amply sufficient for the pious and modest, and such as remember that they are men. But because many are the species of blasphemy which these virulent dogs utter against God, we shall, as far as the case admits, give an answer to each. Foolish men raise many grounds of quarrel with God as if they held him subject to their accusations. First, they ask why God is offended with the creatures who have not provoked him by any previous offense, for to devote to destruction whomsoever he pleases more resembles the caprice of a tyrant than the legal sentence of a judge. And therefore there is reason to expostulate with God if at his mere pleasure men are, without any dessert of their own, predestinated to eternal death. If at any time thoughts of this kind come into the minds of the pious, they will be sufficiently armed to repress them by considering how sinful it is to insist on knowing the causes of the divine will since it is itself and justly ought to be the cause of all that exists. For if his will has any cause, there must be something antecedent to it and to which it is annexed. This it were impious to imagine. The will of God is the supreme rule of righteousness so that everything which he wills must be held to be righteous by the mere fact of his willing it. Therefore, when it is asked why the Lord did so, we must answer because he pleased. But if you proceed farther to ask why he pleased, you ask for something greater and something more sublime than the will of God and nothing such can be found. Let human temerity then be quiet and cease to inquire after what exists not. Let's perhaps it fails to find what does exist. This, I say, will be sufficient to restrain anyone who would reverently contemplate the secret things of God. Against the audacity of the wicked who hesitate not openly to blaspheme, God will sufficiently defend himself by his own righteousness. Without our assistance, when depriving their consciences of all means of evasion, he shall hold them under conviction and make them feel their guilt. We, however, give no continence to the fiction of absolute power, which, as it is heathenish, so it ought justly to be held in detestation by us. We do not imagine God to be lawless. He is a law unto himself because, as Plato says, men laboring under the influence of concupiscence need law. But the will of God is not only free from all vice, but is the supreme standard of perfection, the law of all laws. But we deny that he is bound to give an account of his procedure, and we moreover deny that we are fit of our own ability to give judgment in such a case. Wherefore, when we are tempted to go farther than we ought, let this consideration detour us. Thou shalt be justified when thou speakest and be clear when thou judges. Psalm 51.4. Three. God may thus quell his enemies by silence, but lest we should allow them with impunity to hold his sacred name in derision, he supplies us with weapons against them from his word. Accordingly, when we are accosted in such terms as these, why did God from the first predestined some to death when, as they were not yet in existence, they could not have merited the sentence of death? Let us by way of reply ask in our turn, what do you imagine that God owes to man if he is pleased to estimate him by his own nature? As we are all vitiated by sin, we cannot but be hateful to God, and that not from tyrannical cruelty, but the strictest justice. But if all whom the Lord predestines to death are naturally liable to the sentence of death, of what injustice pray do they complain? Should all the sons of Adam come to dispute and contend with their Creator, because by his eternal providence they were, before birth, doomed to perpetual destruction? When God comes to reckon with them, what will they be able to mutter against this defense? If all are taken from a corrupt mass, it is not strange that all are subject to condemnation. Let them not, therefore, charge God with injustice. If by his eternal judgment they are doomed to a death, which they themselves feel that, whether they will or not, they are drawn spontaneously by their own nature. Hence it appears how perverse is this affectation of murmuring, when, of set purpose, they suppress the cause of condemnation, which they are compelled to recognize in themselves, that they may lay blame upon God. But though I should confess a hundred times that God is the author, and it is most certain that he is, they do not, however, thereby efface their own guilt, which, engraven on their consciences, is ever and a none presenting itself to their view. Four, they again object, were not men predestinated by the ordination of God to that corruption which is now held forth as the cause of condemnation? If so, when they perish in their corruptions, they do nothing else than suffer punishment for that calamity into which, by the predestination of God, Adam fell, and dragged all his posterity headlong with him. Is not he, therefore, unjust in this cruelly mocking his creatures? I admit that by the will of God, all the sons of Adam fell into that state of wretchedness in which they are now involved. And this is just what I said at the first, that we must always return to the mere pleasure of the divine will, the cause of which is hidden in himself. But it does not forthwith follow that God lies open to this charge, for we will answer with Paul in these words. Nay, but, oh man, who art thou that replies against God? Shall the thing form say to him who formed it? Why hast thou made me thus? Has not the potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor? Romans 9, 20, 21. They will deny that the justice of God is thus truly defended, and will allege that we seek an evasion, such as those are want to employ who have no good excuse. For what more seems to be said here than just that the power of God is such as cannot be hindered so that he can do whatsoever he pleases? But it is far otherwise, for what stronger reason can be given than when we are ordered to reflect who God is? How could he who is judge of the world commit any unrighteousness? If it properly belongs to the nature of God to do judgment, he must naturally love justice and abhor injustice. Wherefore, the apostle did not, as if he had been caught in a difficulty, have recourse to evasion. He only intimated that the procedure of divine justice is too high to be scanned by human measure or comprehended by the feebleness of human intellect. The apostle indeed confesses that in the divine judgments, there is a depth in which all the minds of men must be engulfed if they attempt to penetrate into it. But he also shows how unbecoming it is to reduce the works of God to such a law as that we can presume to condemn them the moment they accord not with our reason. There is a well-known saying of Solomon, which, however, few properly understand. The great God that formed all things both rewardeth the fool and rewardeth transgressors. Proverbs 26-10. For he is speaking of the greatness of God, whose pleasure it is to inflict punishment on fools and transgressors, though he is not pleased to bestow his spirit upon them. It is a monstrous infatuation in men to seek to subject that which has no bounds to their little measure of reason. Paul gives the name of elect to the angels who maintain their integrity. If their steadfastness was owing to the good pleasure of God, the revolt of the others proves that they were abandoned. Of this no other cause can be induced than reprobation, which is hidden in the secret counsel of God. Five. Now, should some mannese or celestine has come forward to arraign divine providence? See section eight. I say with Paul that no account of it can be given, because by its magnitude it far surpasses our understanding. Is there anything strange or absurd in this? Would we have the power of God so limited as to be unable to do more than our mind can comprehend? I say with Augustine that the Lord has created those who, as he certainly foreknew, were to go to destruction, and he did so because he so willed. Why he willed it is not ours to ask, as we cannot comprehend nor can it become us even to raise a controversy as to the justice of divine will. Whenever we speak of it, we are speaking of the supreme standard of justice. But when justice clearly appears, why should we raise any question of injustice? Let us not therefore be ashamed to stop their mouths after the example of Paul. Whenever they presume to carp, let us begin to repeat who are ye miserable men that bring an accusation against God and bring it because he does not adapt the greatness of his works to your meager capacity as everything must be perverse that is hidden from the flesh. The immensity of the divine judgments is known to you by clear experience. You know that they are called a great deep, Psalm 36.6. Now, look at the narrowness of your own minds and say whether it can comprehend the decrees of God. Why then should you, by infatuated inquisitiveness, plunge yourself into an abyss which reason itself tells you will prove your destruction? Why are you not deterred, in some degree at least, by what the book of Job, as well as the prophetical books, declare concerning the incomprehensible wisdom and dreadful power of God? If your mind is troubled, decline not to embrace the counsel of Augustine. You, a man, expect an answer from me. I also am a man, wherefore let us both listen to him who says, oh man, who art thou? Believing ignorance is better than presumptuous knowledge. Seek merits, you will find not but punishment. Oh, the height, Peter denies a thief believes. Oh, the height, do you ask the reason I tremble at the height? Reason you, I will wonder. Dispute you, I will believe. I see the height, I cannot sound the depth. Paul found rest because he found wonder. He calls the judgments of God unsearchable. And have you come to search them? He says that his ways are past finding out. And do you seek to find them out? We shall gain nothing by proceeding farther, for neither will the Lord satisfy the petulance of these men, nor does he need any other defense than that which he used by his spirit, who spoke by the mouth of Paul. We unlearn the art of speaking well when we cease to speak with God. Six, impiety starts another objection, which however seeks not so much to discriminate God as to excuse the sinner, though he who is condemned by God as a sinner cannot ultimately be acquitted without impugning the judge. This then is the scoffing language which profane tongues employ. Why should God blame men for things the necessity of which he has imposed by his own predestination? What could they do? Could they struggle with his decrees? It were in vain for them to do it since they could not possibly succeed. It is not just therefore to punish them for things the principle cause of which is in the predestination of God. Here I will abstain from a defense to which ecclesiastical writers usually recur, that there is nothing in the prescience of God to prevent him from regarding man as a sinner, since the evils which he foresees are man's, not his. This would not stop the cavaler who would still insist that God might, if he had pleased, have prevented the evils which he foresaw. And not having done so must, with determinate counsel, have created man for the very purpose of so acting on the earth. But if by the providence of God, man was created on the condition of afterwards doing whatever he does, then that which he cannot escape and which he is constrained by the will of God to do, cannot be charged upon him as a crime. Let us therefore see what is the proper method of solving the difficulty. First, all must admit what Solomon says. The Lord has made all things for himself, yea, even the wicked for the day of evil. Proverbs 16.4. Now, since the arrangement of all things is in the hand of God, since to him belongs the disposal of life and death, he arranges all things by his sovereign counsel in such a way that individuals are born who are doomed from the womb to certain death. And are to glorify him by their destruction. If anyone alleges that no necessity is laid upon them by the providence of God, but rather that they are created by him in that condition, because he foresaw their future depravity, he says something but does not say enough. Ancient writers indeed occasionally employ this solution, though with some degree of hesitation. The school men again rest in it as if it could not be gained, said. I, for my part, am willing to admit that mere prescience lays no necessity on the creatures, though some do not assent to this, but hold that it is itself the cause of things. But vala, though otherwise not greatly skilled in sacred matters, seems to me to have taken a shrewter and more acute view when he shows that the dispute is superfluous since life and death are acts of the divine will rather than of prescience. If God merely foresaw human events and did not also arrange and dispose of them at his pleasure, there might be room for agitating the question how far his foreknowledge amounts to necessity. But since he foresees the things which are to happen, simply because he has decreed that they are so to happen, it is vain to debate about prescience. While it is clear that all events take place by his sovereign appointment. End of section 42.