THE DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION.

335

Laud was reproved in 1604 for maintaining in his exercise for Bachelor of Divinity at Oxford that there could be no true church without bishops; "which was thought to cast a bone of contention between the Church of England and the Reformed on the Continent." Even as late as 1618, in the reign of James I., an English bishop and several Anglican clergymen sat in the Synod of Dort, with a presbyter for its moderator.

The Anglican Church agreed with the Protestant churches on the continent, on the subject of predestination. On this subject, for a long period, the Protestants generally were united in opinion. They adopted the Augustinian tenet. The impotency of the will is affirmed by Luther as strongly as by Calvin. Melancthon's gradual modification of the doctrine, which allowed to the will a cooperative agency in conversion, only affected a portion of the Lutheran Church. The leaders of the English Reformation, from the time when the death of Henry VIII. placed them firmly upon Protestant ground, profess the doctrine of absolute, as distinguished from conditional, predestination, which is the essential feature of both the Augustinian and Calvinistic systems. It is true that Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer have not left so definite expressions on this subject in their writings as as is the case with the Elizabethan bishops. But the seventeenth of the Articles cannot fairly be interpreted in any other sense than that of unconditional election; and the cautions which are appended, instead of being opposed to this interpretation, demonstrate the correctness of it; for who was ever" thrust into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living," by the opposite doctrine? 1

1 It is important to observe, that in the inquiry whether the Articles are "Calvinistic" or not, this term is used in contradistinction to Arminian. Among the writers in defense of their non-Calvinistic character is Archbishop Lawrence, Bampton Lectures (1804). On the same side, with some hesitation, is Bishop Harald Browne, who reviews the controversy. An Exposit. of the xxxIx. Articles (1858.) Bishop Burnet, himself a Latitudinarian, in his dispassionate dis

66

Bradford when in prison in London disputed on this subject with certain free-willers," of whom he wrote to his fellow-martyrs then at Oxford. Ridley's letter in reply certainly implies sympathy with his friend in this opinion.1 Strype says that Ridley and Bradford wrote on predestination, and that Bradford's treatise was approved by Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer. The relations of Cranmer to Bucer and Peter Martyr throw light on his opinion relative to this question. Bucer, before he was called to England, had dedicated his exposition of the Romans, in which he sets forth the doctrine of absolute predestination, to Cranmer. Peter Martyr elaborately defended this tenet at Oxford, and replied to the anti-Calvinistic treatises of Smith, his predecessor, and of Pighius, the opponent of Calvin. It was during the residence of Martyr at Oxford, that the Articles were framed.2 On the accession of Mary, Cranmer offered to defend, in conjunction with his friend Martyr, in a public disputation, the doctrines which had been established in the previous reign. It is impossible to believe that they materially differed on this prominent point of theological belief. There is more ground for the assertion that the formularies of the Church of England are Augustinian, in distinction from

cussion of the subject, says: "It is not be denied that the Article [xvii.] seems to be framed according to St. Austin's doctrine." "It is very probable that those who penned it meant that the decree is absolute." Exposition of the XXXIX. Articles (Art. xvii.).

1 The moderation of Ridley is indicated in the remark that he dares not write otherwise on this subject "than the very text doth, as it were, lead me by the hand." Works (Parker Soc.), p. 368.

2 "In das, von der Londoner Synode im Jahr 1552, aufgefasste Glaubensbekenntniss der Englischen Kirche, wurden die Lehre von der Erbsünde, der Praedestination, und der Rechtfertigung, aufgenommen, so wie Martyr, und mit ihm alle gleichzeitigen protestantischen Theologen in England sie aufgestellt hatten." Dr. C. Schmidt, Peter Martyr Vermigli, Leben u. ausgewählt. Schriften, p. 117.

8 Upon the Calvinism of Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer, see Hunt, Religious Thought in England, i. 33. Hunt refers to Cranmer's notes on the Great Bible, as settling the point that he was a "moderate Calvinist."

CALVINISM IN ENGLAND.

337

Calvinistic. Yet it is admitted by candid scholars that at the beginning of Elizabeth's reign "Calvinistic teaching generally prevailed." 2 But through the whole reign of Edward, also, Calvin's personal influence was great in England. His controversy with Pighius, and the expulsion of Bolsec from Geneva in 1551, excited general attention. It was about this time that election and kindred topics began to be agitated in England. Under date of September 10, 1552, Bartholomew Traheron wrote to Bullinger: "I am exceedingly desirous to know what you

1 The particulars in which Calvin varied from Augustine are these. Augustine made the fall of Adam, the first sin, the object of a permissive decree. Calvin was not satisfied with a bare, passive permission on the part of God, and makes statements which tend to the supralapsarian idea. (See supra, p. 202.) This view was developed by Beza and a section of the Calvinists. But infralapsarian or Augustinian Calvinism has had the suffrages of a majority. It is found in the Westminster Confession, and even the creed of the Synod of Dort does not go beyond it. Augustine held to the præterition, instead of the reprobation of the wicked; or rather to their reprobation, not to sin, but to the punishment of sin. (For the passages see Münscher, Dogmengeschichte, i. 402.) High Calvinists held to a positive decree of reprobation, analogous to that of election; yet denied that God is the author of sin. Calvin differed from Augustine in holding to the perseverance of all believers; that is, that none but the elect ever exercise saving faith. Augustine attributed to the sacraments a greater effect on the non-elect. Thus he held that all baptized infants are saved. This sacramental tenet is often declared to be a feature of the Anglican system, as opposed to that of Calvin. (See, e. g., Blunt, Dict. of Doctr. and Hist. Theol., p. 103.) But Calvin teaches, not indeed that a saving measure of grace is given to all baptized children; but still that all such are "engrafted into the body of the church," "accepted as His [God's] children by the solemn symbol of adop tion," and that "God has his different degrees of regenerating those whom He has adopted." Inst., Iv. xvi. 9, 31. He teaches that grace is imparted, to some extent, to non-elect adults, who are thus rendered more inexcusable. The ex opere operato theory of the sacraments, the theory of their intrinsic efficiency, independently of the feeling of the recipient, is denied - in the XLII. Article, expressly—and "the wholesome effect or operation" of them is confined "to such only as worthily receive the same." Article XVII. affirms that " we must receive God's promises in such wise as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture." This is sometimes said to be anti-Calvinistic. But Calvin says that "the voice of the Gospel addresses all men generally," and that "the promises are offered equally to the faithful and the impious." Inst., III. xxii. 10, and II. v. 10. The Article implies the Calvinistic or Augustinian distinction between the "secret will," or purpose, and "that will of God" which is expressly declared.

2 Blunt, Dict. of Doctr. and Historical Theol., art. "Calvinism," p. 105.

and the other very learned men, who live at Zurich, think respecting the predestination and Providence of God." "The greater number among us, of whom I own myself to be one, embrace the opinion of John Calvin as being perspicuous, and most agreeable to Holy Scripture. And we truly thank God that that excellent treatise of the very learned and excellent John Calvin against Pighius and one Georgius Siculus should have come forth at the very time when the question began to be agitated among us. For we confess that he has thrown much light upon the subject, or rather so handled it as that we have never before seen anything more learned or more plain." At this time, as Bullinger indicates by his reply, even he was not satisfied with the supralapsarian tenet, the modification of Augustinism, which Calvin had broached; the theory that the first sin is the object of an efficient decree.2 After the accession of Elizabeth, the Institutes of Calvin "were generally in the hands of the clergy, and might be considered their text-book of theology." 3

But while it is true that the Anglican divines of the sixteenth century may be said to be Calvinistic in their opinion respecting the divine decrees, it is also true that they were, as a rule, not rigid in the profession and maintenance of this dogma. On this topic, they shared in the prevailing belief of the Protestants of that age. But they combined in their theology other elements which stood 1 Original Letters, p. 325.

2 After Peter Martyr took up his residence at Zurich (in 1556), Bullinger went farther than before in his assertion of predestination. See Herzog, Real-Encycl., art. "Bullinger."

* Blunt, ut supra. We find explicit proofs that Jewel, Nowell, Sandys, Cox, professed to concur with the Reformers of Zurich and Geneva in every point of doctrine. Hallam, Const. Hist., ch. vii. Archbishop Grindal (then Bishop of London), writing June 6, 1552, says, in reference to certain Lutherans at Bremen: "It is astonishing that they are raising such commotions about predestination. They should at least consult their own Luther on the bondage of the will.' For what else do Bucer, Calvin, and Martyr teach, that Luther has not maintained in that treatise?" (Zurich Letters, 2d ed., p. 142.) It was considered that these leading Reformers were substantially united on this subject.

CALVINISM IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

339

out in more distinct relief. And the tendency to go back to antiquity, to seek for moderate, and to avoid obnoxious conceptions of doctrine; in a word, the peculiar spirit fostered by the whole Anglican system, tended more and more to blunt the sharpness of doctrinal statements on this subject. The contrast is marked, in this particular, between Whitgift, a strenuous Calvinist, and Hooker, who approved, in general, of the Calvinistic system, but represents in his whole tone the school of distinctively Anglican theologians which was acquiring an increasing strength. As late as 1595, the Lambeth Articles, containing the strongest assertion of unconditional election, and of reprobation also, were subscribed by Whitgift, then Archbishop of Canterbury, by the bishops of London and Bangor, and with slight verbal amendments, by the Archbishop of York, and transmitted by Whitgift to the University of Cambridge; these Articles being, he said, an explication of the doctrine of the Church of England.2 At this time dissent from Calvinism had begun distinctly to manifest itself; and gradually the Arminian doctrine spread in England until, during the next reign, it became prevalent in the established Church.3

The great and almost the only topic of doctrinal con

1 Hooker, in the copious Preface to his Treatise, lauds Calvin, whom he pronounces “incomparably the wisest man that ever the French Church did enjoy, since the hour it enjoyed him." He praises Calvin's "Institutes" and Commentaries, and has no contest with his doctrinal system. At the same time, Hooker's work is tinged throughout with the characteristics of the Anglican school. Principal Tulloch has interesting remarks on what he terms "the comprehensiveness and genial width of view" of the Anglican Calvinists, such as Jewel and Hooker. English Puritanism and its Leaders, pp. 5, 7, 41.

2 The Lambeth Articles may be found in Neal, History of the Puritans, i. 209, and in Cardwell, History of the Articles (App. v.) p. 343. Cardwell prints the Articles, both as written by Whitaker and as subscribed. If Art. V. asserts perseverance in the exercising of true and justifying faith of the elect only, Art. VI. affirms that all who are possessed of this faith have a full assurance and certainty of their everlasting salvation. The Articles of the Episcopal Church adopted in Ireland in 1615, were decidedly Calvinistic. Archbishop Usher, who became Primate of the Irish Church in 1624, was a most learned advocate of this type of theology.