A Theodicy, or, Vindication of the Divine Glory Part 22

The relation between the two brothers during life; the loss of the birthright blessing and promises on the part of Esau; the temporary subjugation of his descendants to the Hebrews under David; their final and complete subjugation under the Maccabees; and especially their exclusion from the peculiar privileges of the people of G.o.d, through all the periods of their history, are included." Suppose all this to be true, what relation has it to the election of some individuals to eternal life, and the reprobation of others?

We shall not dwell upon other portions of the chapter in question; for, if the foregoing remarks be just, it will be easy to dispose of every text which may, at first view, appear to support the Calvinistic doctrine of election. We shall dismiss the consideration of the ninth chapter of Romans with an extract from Dr. Macknight, who, although a firm believer in the Calvinistic view of election and reprobation, does not find any support for his doctrine in this portion of Scripture. "Although some pa.s.sages in this chapter," says he, "which pious and learned men have understood of the election and reprobation of individuals, are in the foregoing ill.u.s.tration interpreted of the election of nations to be the people of G.o.d, and to enjoy the advantage of an external revelation, and of their losing these honourable distinctions, the reader must not, on that account, suppose the author rejects the doctrines of the decree and foreknowledge of G.o.d. These doctrines are taught in other pa.s.sages of Scripture: see Rom. viii, 29." Thus this enlightened critic candidly abandons the ninth chapter of Romans, and seeks support for his Calvinistic view of the divine decrees elsewhere.

Let us, then, proceed to examine the eighth chapter of Romans, upon which he relies. The words are as follow: "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified." We need have no dispute with the Calvinists respecting the interpretation of these words. If we mistake not, we may adopt their own construction of them, and yet clearly show that they lend not the least support to their views of election and reprobation. "As to _know_," says Professor Hodge, "is often to _approve_ and _love_, it may express the idea of peculiar affection in the case; or it may mean to _select_ or _determine upon_." These two interpretations, as he truly says, "do not essentially differ. The one is but a modification of the other." "The idea, therefore, obviously is, that those whom G.o.d peculiarly loved, and by thus loving, distinguished or selected from the rest of mankind; or, to express both ideas in one word, those whom he _elected_ he predestinated, &c." Thus, according to this commentator, those whom G.o.d elected, he also predestinated, called, justified, and, finally, glorified.

Now, suppose all this to be admitted, let us consider whether it gives any support to the Calvinistic creed of election. It teaches that all those whom G.o.d elects shall be ultimately saved; but not one word or one syllable does it say with respect to the principle or ground of his election. It tells us that G.o.d, in his infinite wisdom, selects one portion of mankind as the objects of his saving mercy,-the heirs of eternal glory; but it does not say that this selection, this _approbation_, this _peculiar love_, is wholly without foundation in the character or condition of the elect. It tells us that G.o.d has numbered the elect, and written their names in the book of life; but it does not tell us that, in any case, he has taken precisely such as he has left, or left precisely such as he has taken. The bare fact of the election is all that is here disclosed. The reason, or the ground, or the principle, of that election is not even alluded to; and we are left to gather it either from other portions of Scripture, or from the eternal dictates of justice and mercy. Hence, as this pa.s.sage makes no allusion to the ground or reason of the divine election, it does not begin to touch the controversy we have with theologians of the Calvinistic school. Every link in the chain here presented is perfect, except that which connects its first link, the election to eternal life, with the unconditional decree of G.o.d; and that link, the only one in controversy, is absolutely wanting. We have no occasion to break the chain; for it is only to the imagination that it seems to be unconditionally bound to the throne of the Omnipotent.

As this pa.s.sage, then, determines nothing with respect to the ground or reason of election, so we have as much right to affirm, even in the presence of such language, that G.o.d did really foresee a difference where he has made so great a distinction, as the Calvinists have to suppose that so great a distinction has been made by a mere arbitrary and capricious exercise of power. That we have a better reason for this position than our opponents can produce for theirs, we shall endeavour to show in the ensuing section.

Section III.

The Calvinistic scheme of election inconsistent with the impartiality and glory of the divine goodness.

Having seen that the unequal distribution of favours, which obtains in the wise economy of Providence, distinguis.h.i.+ng nation from nation, as well as individual from individual, is not inconsistent with the perfection of the divine goodness; and having also seen that the Scripture doctrine of election makes no other distinctions than those which take place in the providence of G.o.d, and is equally reconcilable with the glory of his character, we come now to consider the Calvinistic scheme of election and reprobation. We have shown on what principles the providence of G.o.d, which makes so many distinctions among men, may be vindicated; let us now see on what principles the Calvinistic scheme of election and reprobation seeks to justify itself. If we mistake not, this scheme of predestination is as unlike the providence of G.o.d in its principles as it is in the appalling distinctions which it makes among the subjects of the moral government of the world.

"Predestination," says Calvin, "we call the eternal decree of G.o.d, by which he has determined in himself, what he would have to become of every individual of mankind. For they are not all created with a similar destiny; but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal d.a.m.nation for others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or the other of these ends, we say, he is predestinated either to life or to death."(208) Again: "In conformity, therefore, to the clear doctrine of Scripture, we a.s.sert, that by an eternal and immutable counsel, G.o.d has once for all determined, both whom he would admit to salvation and whom he would condemn to destruction."(209)

The doctrine of predestination is set forth in the Westminster Confession of Faith, in the following terms: "By the decree of G.o.d, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death."

"These men and angels, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished."

"Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, G.o.d, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions or causes moving him thereunto; and all to the praise of his glorious grace."

"As G.o.d hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto.

Wherefore, they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only."

"The rest of mankind, G.o.d was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pa.s.s by, and to ordain to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice."

The defenders of this system a.s.sume the position, that as "by Adam's sin the whole human race became a corrupt ma.s.s, and justly subject to eternal d.a.m.nation; so that no one can blame G.o.d's righteous decision, if none are saved from perdition."(210) Augustine expressly says: "But why faith is not given to all, need not move the faithful, who believe that by one all came into condemnation, doubtless the most just; _so that there would be no just complaining of G.o.d, though no one should be freed_." And again: "The dominion of death has so far prevailed over men, that the deserved punishment would drive all headlong into a second death likewise, of which there is no end, if the undeserved grace of G.o.d did not deliver them from it."(211) Such is the picture of the divine justice, which the advocates of predestination have presented, from the time of Augustine, the great founder of the doctrine, down to the present day. It surely furnishes a sufficiently dark background on which to display the divine mercy to advantage.

We are told, however, that we should not judge of the proceeding of G.o.d, according to our notions of justice. This is certainly true, if the divine justice is fairly represented in the scheme of predestination; for that is clearly unlike all that is called justice among men. If G.o.d can create countless myriads of beings, who, because they come into the world with a depraved nature, and "can do nothing but sin," he regards with such displeasure, as to leave them without hope and without remedy; and not only so, but dooms them to eternal misery on account of an unavoidable continuance in sin; it must be confessed, that we should not presume to apply our notions of justice to his dealings with the world. They would more exactly accord with our notions of injustice, cruelty, and oppression, than with any others of which we are capable of forming any conception.

But, if we are not to decide according to our notions of justice, how shall we judge, or form any opinion respecting the equity of the divine proceeding? Shall we judge according to some notion which we do not possess, or shall we not judge at all? This last would seem to be the wiser course; but it is one which the Calvinists themselves will not permit us to adopt. They tell us, that the predestination of the greater part of mankind to eternal death is "to the praise of G.o.d's glorious justice." But how are we to behold this glorious manifestation of the divine justice, if we may not view it through any medium known to us, or contemplate it in any light which may have dawned upon our minds?

Indeed, although the defenders of this doctrine often declare that the predestination of so many men and angels to eternal misery, displays the justice of G.o.d in all its glory; yet their own writings furnish the most abundant and conclusive evidence, that they themselves can see no appearance of justice in such a proceeding. On various occasions they do not hesitate to tell us, that although they cannot recognise the justice of such a proceeding, yet they believe it to be just, because it is the proceeding of G.o.d. But how can that be a display of justice to us, which, according to all our notions, wears the appearance of the most frightful injustice? Calvin himself admits, that the justice of G.o.d, which is supposed to be so brightly displayed in the predestination of so many immortal beings to endless woe, is, in reality, therein involved in clouds and darkness. Yet he does not fail to deduce an argument in its favour from "the very obscurity which excites such dread."(212)

It seems clear, that if the divine justice is really displayed in the punishment of the reprobate, it would have been exhibited on a still more magnificent scale by the condemnation of the whole human race. For, according to Calvinism, all were equally deserving of the divine displeasure, and the saved are distinguished from the lost only by the election of G.o.d. Hence, this scheme shows the justice of G.o.d to be limited, or not displayed on so grand and imposing a scale as it might have been; that is to say, it shows the justice of G.o.d to be less than infinite. But if such be the justice of G.o.d, we certainly should not complain that it has been limited by his mercy; we should rather rejoice, indeed, to believe that it had been thereby entirely extinguished.

Notwithstanding the claims of divine justice, all were not reprobated and doomed to eternal death. A certain portion of mankind are elected and saved, "to the praise of his glorious grace." Now, it is conceded by Calvinists, that "all the circ.u.mstances which distinguish the elect from others are the fruit of their election."(213) This proposition is deduced by a Calvinistic divine from the "Westminster Confession of Faith." It is also conceded, that if the same grace which is given to the elect, should be bestowed upon the reprobate, they also would be saved.(214) Why, then, is it not bestowed? Why this fearful limitation of the divine mercy? Can the justice of G.o.d be manifested only at the expense of his mercy, and his mercy only at the expense of his justice? Or, is the everlasting mercy of G.o.d, that sublime attribute which const.i.tutes the excellency and glory of his moral nature, so limited and straitened on all sides, that it merely selects here and there an object of its favour, while it leaves thousands and millions, equally within its reach, exposed to the eternal ravages of the spoiler? If so, then are we bound to conclude, that the mercy of G.o.d is not infinite; that it is not only limited, but also partial and arbitrary in its operation? But such is not the mercy of G.o.d. This is not a capricious fondness, nor yet an arbitrary dictate of feeling; it is a uniform and universal rule of goodness.

To select one here and there out of the ma.s.s of mankind, while others, precisely like them in all respects, are left to perish, is not mercy; it is favouritism. The tyrant may have his favourites as well as others. But G.o.d is not a respecter of persons. If he selects one, as the object of his saving mercy, he will select all who stand in the like condition; otherwise, his mercy were no more mercy, but a certain capricious fondness of feeling, unworthy of an earthly monarch, and much more of the august Head and Ruler of the moral universe.

These views and feelings are not peculiar to the opponents of Calvinism.

They exist in the bosom of Calvinists themselves; only they are so crushed beneath a system, that they cannot find that freedom of development, nor that fulness of utterance, which so rightfully belongs to them, and which is so essential to their entire healthfulness and beauty.

We shall give only one ill.u.s.tration of the justness of this remark, although we might produce a hundred. After having endeavoured to vindicate the mercy of G.o.d, as displayed in the scheme of predestination, Dr. Hill candidly declares: "Still, however, _a cloud hangs over the subject_; and there is a difficulty in reconciling the mind to a system, which, after laying this foundation, that special grace is necessary to the production of human virtue, adopts as its distinguis.h.i.+ng tenet this position, that that grace is denied to many."(215) Notwithstanding his most elaborate defence of predestination, he may well say, that "a cloud still hangs over the subject," and darkens the mercy of G.o.d.

Some of the stereotyped attempts of Calvinists to escape from the cloud which hangs over their doctrine are too weak to deserve a serious refutation. We are often asked, for example, if G.o.d may not do what he pleases with his own? Most a.s.suredly he may; but does it please him, according to the high supralapsarian notion of Calvin, to create myriads of men and angels, to the end that they may be eternally d.a.m.ned? Does it please him, according even to the sublapsarian scheme, to leave the great ma.s.s of mankind in the helpless and forlorn condition in which they were born, without a.s.sistance, and then subject them to eternal misery, because they would not render an obedience beyond their power? Truly, the sovereign Creator and Ruler of the world may do what he pleases with his own; but yet we insist, that it is his supremest pleasure to deal with his creatures according to the eternal principles of justice and mercy.

His power is infinite, we admit, nay, we joyfully believe; but yet it is not a power which works according to the lawless pleasure of an unmitigated despot. It moves within a sphere of light and love. G.o.d's infinite wisdom and goodness superintend and surround all its workings; otherwise its omnipotent actings would soon carry the goodly frame of the world, together with all the blessed inhabitants thereof, into a state of utter confusion and chaotic night; leaving occasion for none, save the blind idolaters of power, to exclaim, "May he not do what he pleases with his own?"

We are also told, that "G.o.d is under no obligation to his creatures."

Supposing this to be true, (though true most certainly it is not,) yet does he not owe it to himself-does he not owe it to the eternal principles of truth and goodness-does he not owe it to the glory of his own empire over the world-to deal with his rational and immortal creatures, otherwise than according to the dark scheme of Calvinistic predestination? Nay, is it not due to the creature himself, that he should have some little chance or opportunity to embrace the life which G.o.d has set before him? Or, in default of such opportunity, is it not due to him that he should be exempt from the wages of the second death?

Confessing the wisdom and justice of predestination, as maintained by themselves, to be above our comprehension, the Calvinists are accustomed to remind us of the littleness, the weakness, and the blindness of the human mind, and how dangerous it is for beings like ourselves to pry into mysteries. We are aware, indeed, that our faculties are limited on all sides, and that we are exceedingly p.r.o.ne to a.s.sume more than belongs to us. We are not sure that the human mind, so little and so a.s.suming, appears to any very great advantage in its advocacy of the Calvinistic scheme of predestination. This scheme is not only found in the ninth chapter of Romans, by a strange misapprehension of the whole scope and design of the apostle's argument, but, after having based it upon this misinterpretation of the divine word, its advocates persist in regarding all opposition to it as an opposition against G.o.d. As often as we dispute the doctrine, they cry out, "Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against G.o.d?"

This rebuke was well administered by St. Paul. He applied it to those who, understanding his doctrine, did not hesitate to arraign the equity of the divine proceeding in the election of one nation in preference to another to const.i.tute the visible Church on earth. This was not only to reply against G.o.d's word, but also against the manifest arrangements and dispensations of his providence. But it is not well applied by Calvinists, unless they possess an infallibility which authorizes them to identify their interpretation of the word of G.o.d with the word itself. It is not well applied by them, unless they are authorized to put themselves in the place of G.o.d. If they have no right to do this, we must insist upon it that it is one thing to reply against G.o.d, and quite another to reply against Calvin and his followers.

Section IV.

The true ground and reason of election to eternal life shows it to be consistent with the infinite goodness of G.o.d.

We agree with both Calvinistic and Arminian writers in the position, that no man is elected to eternal life on account of his merits. Indeed, the idea that a human being can merit anything, much less eternal life, of G.o.d, is preposterous in the extreme. All his gifts are of pure grace. The creation of the soul with glorious and immortal powers was an act of pure, unmixed favour. The duty of loving and serving him, which we are permitted to enjoy, is an exalted privilege, and should inspire us with grat.i.tude, instead of begetting the miserable conceit that our service, even when most perfect, could deserve anything further from G.o.d, or establish any claims upon his justice. This view, which we take to be the true one, as completely shuts out all occasion of boasting as does the scheme of election maintained by the Calvinists.

It is objected, that G.o.d did not elect individuals to eternal life, because he foresaw that they would repent and believe; since repentance and faith themselves are the fruits of election. If this objection have any force, we are persuaded that it arises from an improper wording, or presentation, of the truth against which it is directed. We cannot suppose that G.o.d elected any one because he foresaw his good works, so as to make election to depend upon them, instead of making them to depend upon election. This does not prevent an individual, however, from having been elected, because G.o.d foresaw from all eternity that the influences attending upon his election would, by his own voluntary cooperation therewith, be rendered effectual to his salvation. This is the ground on which we believe the election of individuals to eternal life to proceed.

Accordingly, we suppose that G.o.d never selected, or determined to save, any one who he foresaw would not yield to the influences of his grace, provided they should be given. And we also suppose that such is the overflowing goodness of G.o.d, that all were elected by him, and had their names written in the book of life, who he foresaw would yield to the influences of his grace, and, by the cooperation therewith, "make their calling and election sure." This scheme appears to possess the following very great advantages:-

1. It does not give such a pervading energy to the operations of divine grace as to exclude all subordinate moral agency from the world, and destroy the very foundation of man's accountability.

2. It does not weaken the motives to the practice of a virtuous and decent life, by a.s.suring the worst part of mankind that they are just as likely to be made the objects of the saving grace of G.o.d as any others. On the contrary, it holds out this terrible warning, that by an obstinate continuance in evil-doing, the wicked may place themselves beyond the effectual influences of divine grace, and set the seal of eternal death to their own souls.

3. It shows the mercy of G.o.d to be infinite. No one, except those who place themselves beyond the possibility of salvation by their own evil deeds, is ever lost. Hence, the mercy of G.o.d, which takes in all whose salvation is within the range of possibility, appears in full-orbed and unclouded splendour. It could not possibly appear greater, or more beautiful, than as it presents itself to our view in this scheme.

4. It shows the justice of G.o.d to be infinite. This, according to the above view, is neither limited by, nor does it limit, the mercy of G.o.d. It acts merely upon those who were not, and never could be made, the objects of mercy; and it acts upon these according to the full measure of their ill-desert, as well as according to the exigencies of the moral empire of G.o.d. It has no limits, except those which circ.u.mscribe and bound the objects of infinite justice.

5. It not only shows the mercy and justice of G.o.d to be as great as can possibly be conceived, but it also shows the perfect harmony and agreement which subsists between these sublime attributes of the Divine Being. It marks out and defines the orbit, in which each revolves in all the perfection and plenitude of its glory, without the least clas.h.i.+ng or interference with the other.

In conclusion, we would simply ask the candid and impartial reader, Does any dark or perplexing "cloud still hang over the subject?" Is "there a difficulty in reconciling the mind to a system," which exhibits the character of G.o.d, and his government of the world, in so pleasing and so advantageous a light? Does not a system, which gives so glad and joyous a response to the demand of G.o.d, "Are not my ways equal?" recommend itself to the affections of the pious mind?

It very clearly seems to us, that, strong as are the convictions of Dr.

Chalmers in favour of "a rigid and absolute predestination,"(216) his affections cannot always be restrained within the narrow confines of so dark a scheme. His language, in pleading for the universality of the gospel offer, contains, it seems to us, as direct, and pointed, and powerful condemnation of his own scheme as can well be found in the whole range of theological literature. "There must be," says he, "a sad misunderstanding somewhere. The commission put into our hands is to go and preach the gospel to every creature under heaven; and the announcement sounded forth in the world from heaven's vault was, Peace on earth, _good-will to men_. There is no freezing limitation here, but a largeness and munificence of mercy boundless as s.p.a.ce, free and open as the expanse of the firmament. We hope, therefore, the gospel, the real gospel, _is as unlike the views of some of its interpreters, as creation, in all its boundless extent and beauty, is unlike the paltry scheme of some wretched scholastic in the middle ages_. The middle age of science and civilization is now terminated; but Christianity also had its middle age, _and this, perhaps, is not yet fully terminated. There is still a remainder of the old spell_, even the spell of human authority, and by which a certain cramp or confinement has been laid on the genius of Christianity. We cannot doubt that the time of its complete emanc.i.p.ation is coming, when it shall break loose from the imprisonment in which it is held; but meanwhile there is, as it were, a stricture upon it, not yet wholly removed, _and in virtue of which the largeness and liberality of Heaven's own purposes have been made to descend in partial and scanty droppings through the strainers of an artificial theology, instead of falling, as they ought, in a universal shower upon the world_."(217)

Is it possible, that this is the language of a man who believes that Heaven's purposes of mercy descend, not upon all men, but only upon the elect? It is even so. Boundless and beautiful as the goodness of G.o.d is in itself; yet, through the strainers of his theology, is it made to descend in partial and scanty droppings merely, and not in one universal shower.

It is good-will, not to _men_, but to the _elect_. Such is the "chilling limitation," and such the frightful "stricture," on the genius of Christianity, from which, in the fervour of his imagination, the great heart of Chalmers burst into a higher and a more genial element of light and love.

Alas! how sad and how sudden the descent, when in the very next paragraph he says: "The names and number of the saved may have been in the view, _nay, even in the design and destination of G.o.d from all eternity_; and still the distinction is carried into effect, not by means of a gospel addressed partially and exclusively to them, but by means of a gospel addressed generally to all. _A partial gospel, in fact, could not have achieved the conversion of the elect_:" that is to say, though it was the design and destination of G.o.d from all eternity to save only a small portion of those whom he might have saved; yet he made the offer of salvation to all, in order to save the chosen few! And if he had not proclaimed this universal offer, by which "the largeness and munificence"

of his mercy are made to _appear_ as "boundless as s.p.a.ce," the elect could not have been saved! If so, is it the real goodness of G.o.d, then, or merely the _appearance_ of universal goodness, that leadeth men to repentance?

"Any charm," says he, "which there is in Christianity to recall or to regenerate _some_, lies in those of its overtures which are so framed as to hold out the offered friends.h.i.+p of G.o.d to all:"(218) that is, that although G.o.d intends and seeks to save only a few, he offers the same salvation to all, to give an efficacious charm to the scheme of redemption! Indeed, if the Calvinistic scheme of an absolute predestination be true, then we admit that there is a charm and a glory in the magnificent delusion, arising from G.o.d's offer of friends.h.i.+p to all, which is not to be found in the truth. But that scheme, as we have seen, is not true; and also, that the goodness of G.o.d is as boundless and beautiful in reality, as it could possibly be in appearance.

We agree with Dr. Chalmers, that the goodness of G.o.d should be viewed, not through the medium of predestination, but as it s.h.i.+nes forth in the light of the glorious gospel. We agree with him, that "we ought to proceed on the obvious representations which Scripture gives of the Deity; and _these beheld in their own immediate light, untinged by the dogma of predestination. G.o.d waiting to be gracious-G.o.d not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance-G.o.d swearing by himself that he has no pleasure in the death of a sinner, but rather that all should come unto him and live-G.o.d beseeching men to enter into reconciliation, and this not as elect, but simply and generally as men and sinners_;-these are the att.i.tudes in which the Father of the human family sets himself forth unto the world-these the terms in which he speaks to us from heaven." It is precisely in this sublime att.i.tude, and in this transporting light, that we rejoice to contemplate the Father of mercies; and this view, it must be confessed, is wholly "untinged with the dogma of predestination."