elect of the Father, before he gave them to his only-begotten Son. Is it inquired whether this was by nature? No, he draws those who were strangers, and so makes them his children. The language of Christ is too clear to be perplexed by the quibbles of sophistry: "No man can come to me, except the Father draw him. Every man that hath heard and learned of the Father, cometh unto me." (z) If all men promiscuously submitted to Christ, election would be common: now the fewness of believers discovers a manifest distinction. Having asserted his disciples therefore, who were given to him, to be the peculiar portion of the Father, Christ a little after adds, “ I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine:" (a) which shews that the whole world does not belong to its Creator; only that grace delivers from the curse and wrath of God, and from eternal death, a few who would otherwise perish, but leaves the world in its destruction to which it has been destined. At the same time, though Christ introduces himself in his mediatorial capacity, yet he claims to himself the right of election, in common with the Father. "I speak not of all," he says; "I know whom I have chosen." (b) If it be inquired whence he chose them; he elsewhere answers, "out of the world," (c) which he excludes from his prayers, when he commends his disciples to the Father. It must be admitted, that when Christ asserts his knowledge of whom he has chosen, it refers to a particular class of mankind, and that they are distinguished, not by the nature of their virtues, but by the decree of heaven. Whence it follows, that none attain any excellence by their own ability or industry, since Christ represents himself as the author of election. His enumeration of Judas among the elect, though he was a devil, only refers to the apostolical office, which, though an illustrious instance of the Divine favour, as Paul so frequently acknowledges in his own person, yet does not include the hope of eternal salvation. Judas, therefore, in his unfaithful exercise of the apostleship, might be worse than a devil; but of those whom Christ has once united to his body, he will never suffer one to perish: for in securing their salvation, he will perform what he has pro

(=) John vi. 44, 45. (a) John xvii. 9. (b) John xiii.'18. (c) John xv. 19.

mised, by exerting the power of God, who is greater than all. What he says in another place, "Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition,' is a rhethorical mode of expressson, called catachresis, but the sense is sufficiently plain. The conclusion is, that God creates whom he chooses to be his children by gratuitous adoption; that the cause of this is wholly in himself; because he exclusively regards his own secret determination.

VIII. But, it will be said, Ambrose, Origen, and Jerome believed that God dispenses his grace among men, according to his foreknowledge of the good use which every individual will make of it. Augustine also was once of the same sentiment; but when he had made a greater proficiency in scriptural knowledge, he not only retracted, but powerfully confuted it. And after his retractation, rebuking the Pelagians for persisting in this error, he says, "Who but must wonder that this most ingenious sense should escape the apostle? For after proposing what was calculated to excite astonishment respecting those children yet unborn, he started to himself, by way of objection, the following question, What then, is there unrighteousness with God? It was the place for him to answer, that God foresaw the merits of each of them; yet he says nothing of this, but resorts to the decrees and mercy of God." And in another place, after having discarded all merits antecedent to election, he says, "Here undoubtedly falls to the ground the vain reasoning of those who defend the foreknowledge of God in opposition to his grace, and affirm 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.' (d) For if he elected us because he foreknew our future good, he must also have foreknown our choice of him:" and more to the like purpose. The testimony should have weight with those who readily acquiesce in the authority of the Fathers. Though Augustine will not allow himself to be disunited from the rest, but shews by clear testimonies the falsehood of that discordance, with the odium

(d) John xv. 16.

of which he was loaded by the Pelagians, he makes the following quotations from Ambrose's book on Predestination. "Whom Christ has mercy on, him he calls. Those who were indevout he could, if he would, have made devout. But God calls whom he pleases, and makes whom he will religious." If I were inclined to compile a whole volume from Augustine, I could easily shew my readers, that I need no words but his; but I am unwilling to burden them with prolixity. But come, let us suppose them to be silent, let us attend to the subject itself. A difficult question was raised, Whether it was a just procedure in God to favour with his grace certain particular persons. This Paul could have decided by a single word, if he had pleaded the consideration of works. Why then does he not do this, but rather continue his discourse involved in the same difficult? Why, but from necessity? for the Holy Spirit, who spoke by his mouth, never laboured under the malady of forgetfulness. Without any evasion or circumlocution, therefore, he answers, that God favours his elect because he will, and has mercy because he will. For this oracle, "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy," (e) is equivalent to a declaration, that God is excited to mercy by no other motive than his own will to be merciful. The observation of Augustine therefore remains true, "that the grace of God does not find men fit to be elected, but makes them so."

IX. We shall not dwell upon the sophistry of Thomas Aquinas, "that the foreknowledge of merits is not the cause of predestination in regard to the act of him who predestinates; but that with regard to us, it may in some sense be so called, according to the particular consideration of predestination: as when God is said to predestinate glory for man according to merits, because he decreed to give him grace by which glory is merited." For since the Lord allows us to contemplate nothing in election but his mere goodness, the desire of any one to see any thing more is a preposterous disposition. But if we were inclined to a contention of subtilty, we should be at no loss to refute this petty sophism of Aquinas. He contends that glory

(e) Exodus xxxiii. 19.

is in a certain sense predestinated for the elect according to their merits, because God predestinates to them the grace by which glory is merited. What if I, on the contrary, reply, that predestination to grace is subordinate to election to life, and attendant upon it? that grace is predestinated to those to whom the possession of glory has been already assigned: because it pleases the Lord to conduct his children from election to justification? For hence it will follow, that predestination to glory is rather the cause of predestination to grace, than the contrary. But let us dismiss these controversies; they are unnecessary with those who think they have wisdom enough in the word of God. For it was truly remarked by an ancient ecclesiastical writer, That they who ascribe God's election to merits, are wiser than they ought to be.

X. It is objected by some, that God will be inconsistent with himself, if he invites all men universally to come to him, and receives only a few elect. Thus, according to them, the universality of the promises destroys the discrimination of special grace: and this is the language of some moderate men, not so much for the sake of suppressing the truth, as to exclude thorny questions, and restrain the curiosity of many. The end is laudable, but the means cannot be approved; for disingenuous evasion can never be excused; but with those who use insult and invective, it is a foul cavil or a shameful error. How the Scripture reconciles these two facts, that by external preaching all are called to repentance and faith, and yet that the spirit of rerepentance and faith is not given to all, I have elsewhere stated, and shall soon have occasion partly to repeat. What they assume, I deny, as being false in two respects. For he who threatens drought to one city while it rains upon another, and who denounces to another place a famine of doctrine, (f) lays himself under no positive obligation to call all men alike. And he who, forbidding Paul to preach the word in Asia, and suffering him not to go into Bithynia, calls him into Macedonia, (g) demonstrates his right to distribute this treasure to whom he pleases. In Isaiah, he still more fully declares his destination of the promises of salvation exclusively for the elect: for of (g) Acts xvi. 6-10.

(ƒ) Amos iv. 7. viii. 11.

them only, and not indiscriminately of all mankind, he declares that they shall be his disciples. (h) Whence it appears, that when the doctrine of salvation is offered to all for their effectual benefit, it is a corrupt prostitution of that which is declared to be reserved particularly for the children of the Church. At present let this suffice, that though the voice of the gospel addresses all men generally, yet the gift of faith is bestowed on few. Isaiah assigns the cause, that "the arm of the Lord" is not "revealed" to all. (i) If he had said, that the gospel is wickedly and perversely despised, because many obstinately refuse to hear it; perhaps there would be some colour for this notion of the universal call. The design of the prophet is not to extenuate the guilt of men, when he states that the source of blindness is God's not deigning to reveal his arm to them; he only suggests that their ears are in vain assailed with external doctrine, because faith is a peculiar gift. I would wish to be informed by these teachers, whether men become children of God by mere preaching, or by faith. Surely, when John declares that all who believe in God's only-begotten Son, are themselves made the children of God, (k) this is not said of all the hearers of the word in a confused mass, but a particular rank is assigned to the faithful, "which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (1) But they say, there is a mutual agreement between faith and the word. This is the case wherever there is any faith; but it is no new thing for the seed to fall among thorns or in stony places; not only because most men are evidently in actual rebellion against God, but because they are not all endued with eyes and ears. Where then will be the consistency of God's calling to himself such as he knows will never come? Let Augustine answer for me: "Do you wish to dispute with me? Rather unite with me in admiration, and exclaim, O the depth! Let us both agree in fear, lest we perish in error." Besides, if election is, as Paul represents it, the parent of faith, I retort that argument upon them, that faith cannot be general, because election is special. For from the connection of causes and effects it is easily inferred, when Paul says, "God hath

(h) Isaiah viii. 16, &c. (i) Isaiah liii. 1. (*) John i. 12. (1) John i. 13.