Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

dual of the human family, for whom the redemption was obtained. 4. That Christ by his atonement merited faith and salvation for none, with such certainty, that the atonement must be applied to them for salvation; but merely acquired for God the Father a perfect willingness, and full power to treat with man upon a new footing-a power of entering into a covenant of grace, or a covenant of works with man, and of prescribing whatever conditions he chose; the performance of which conditions depends entirely on the free will of man; so that it became possible that either all, or none should fulfil them. 5. That the procurement of salvation is more extensive than its application; as salvation was obtained for all, but will be applied to very few. All these are clearly proved to be Arminian tenets, from the Collation published at Hague, and from the expose of their sentiments, in their remonstrance against the second article which contained a list of errors condemned by the Synod of Dort.

Though these views relative to the extent of the atonement, are not fully embraced by any of the clergy of our church, yet there are some of our ministers, who defend the doctrine of universal grace, and, in explaining their views of this subject, give great countenance to not a few of these Arminian tenets, nay, in a great measure adopt them as their own. That they may evince a philanthropy, a love of God towards the whole human family, they maintain that Christ was sent into the world by the Father as a universal remedy, to procure salvation for all men under the condition of faith. They say that though the fruit and efficacy of Christ's death will be enjoyed and experienced by a few only, on whom God, by a special decree, has determined to bestow them, yet Christ died with an intention to save all provided they would believe.* In this manner, they teach that the decree of the death of Christ preceded the

* The opinion here unfolded is, with very little variation, that of the Hopkinsians, which at present is making great progress in the northern churches. Translator.

decree of election,-that in sending Christ into the world, no special respect was had to the elect any more than to the reprobate, and that Christ was equally appointed to be the Saviour of all men. They even distinctly assert that salvation was not intended to be procured for any particular persons, but the possibility of salvation was procured for all. This they tell us was effected by the removal of obstacles which justice placed in the way of man's salvation, which was done by rendering satisfaction to justice, and thus opening a door of salvation, that God, reconciled by the atonement, might, in consistency with the claims of justice, think of entering into a new covenant with man, and of bestowing upon him salvation. But as God foresaw that on account of the wickedness of their hearts, none would believe in Christ, he, by another special decree, determined to bestow upon some faith, thus enabling them to accept of salvation, and become partakers of it; while the rest of the human family would remain in unbelief, and on its account would be condemned. In this they differ from the Arminians, and embrace in so far the truth of the atonement. Such views as these which we have stated are clearly contained in their writings. Camerus* says, "the death of Christ, under the condition of faith belongs equally to all men." Testurdus speaks thus," The end of giving Christ for a propitiation in his blood was, that a new covenant might be entered into with the whole human family, and that without any impeachment of justice, their salvation might be rendered possible, and an offer of it made to them, in the gospel. In this sense, indeed, no one who believes the word of God, can deny that Christ died for all men." Hear also what Amyraut says, "The redemption purchased by Christ may be considered in two respects. 1. Absolutely in relation to those who actually embrace it. 2. Conditionally, as offered on such terms, that if any one will accept it, he shall become a partaker of it. In the former respect it is limited,

* In Cap. 2. Epist. ad Heb. ver. 9. Diss. de Gratia Universali.

In Ireni. The. 78. et 79.

in the latter universal. In like manner its destination is twofold; particular, as having the decree to bestow faith connected with it; universal, when it is considered separately from this decree." This writer says expressly,* "Since the misery of the human family is equal and universal, and the desire which God has to free them from it by a Redeemer, proceeds from the mercy which he exercises towards us as his creatures fallen into destruction, in which we are all equal; the grace of redemption, that he has procured for us, and which he offers us, should be equal and universal, provided we are equally disposed to its reception," &c.

Though all agreed in this, that Christ died for all men, yet they explain themselves differently in relation to the manner in which he died for all. As appears from the quotations given above, some say openly, that Christ died conditionally for all, and absolutely for the elect only. Others, perceiving that this view of the subject leads to gross absurdities, are unwilling to express themselves in this manner, and rather choose to say that Christ did not die for men on condition that they would believe, but that his death for all was absolute whether they would believe or not. Thus that free access to salvation was opened for all who would by faith accept it, and that all obstacles being removed by the death of Christ, and every thing which prevented God from entering into a covenant with man; a way for a new covenant was opened to all men-all were placed precisely in the same salvable state. Yet they all come to this point, that Christ satisfied for all men severally and collectively, and obtained for them remission of sins and salvation; of which if many are deprived, the cause is not to be sought in any insufficiency of Christ's death, nor any failure of will and intention on his part, but in the unbelief alone, of those who wickedly and obstinately reject the salvation offered by Christ.

But the common opinion of the Reformed church, is, that Christ, from the mere good pleasure of his Father, was *Tr, de Pradest. cap. 7.

set apart, and given as a Redeemer and head not to all men, but to a definite number, who by the decree of God constitute his mystical body. They maintain that for these alone, Christ, perfectly acquainted with the nature and extent of the work to which he was called, and knowing whom he was called to save, and to accomplish the decree of their election, and the counsel of his Father, was willing and determined to offer himself up a sacrifice in his death, and to the price of his death added an all-efficient, special intention and will, to substitute himself in their room, and acquire for them faith and salvation.

Whence we easily obtain a distinct statement of the question. 1. The question is not respecting the value and efficacy of the death of Christ; whether as to its intrinsic worth it might be sufficient for the redemption of all men. It is confessed by all, that since its value is infinite, it would have been sufficient for the redemption of the whole human family, had it appeared good to God to extend it to the whole world. To this purpose, a distinction is made by the Fathers, and retained by many divines, "that Christ died sufficiently for all, but efficiently for the elect only." This is perfectly true, if it be understood of the dignity of Christ's death, though the phrase is not accurate if it be referred to the will and purpose of Christ. The question which we discuss, concerns the purpose of the Father in sending his Son, and the intention of the Son in dying. Whether the Father destined his Son for a Saviour to all men and every man, and whether the Son delivered himself up to death, with a design to substitute himself in the room of all men of all nations, to make satisfaction, and acquire salvation for them? Or, whether he resolved to give himself for the elect only, who were given him by the Father to be redeemed, and that he might be their head? The pivot on which the controversy turns is, what was the purpose of the Father in sending his Son to die, and the object which Christ had in view in dying; not what is the value and efficacy of his death. Hence the question does not, as some learned divines have affirmed, respect the revealed will of

God, but his secret will, his decree, to which the mission and death of Christ are to be referred, as all must agree.

We do not enquire respecting the fruits and efficacy of Christ's death, whether all will actually be partakers of these? which was anciently held by Puccius and Huberus. Our opponents extend these to believers only. But the question refers to the purpose of God in sending his Son into the world, and the purpose of Christ in his death.Whether did he respect all men universally, so as to substitute himself in their room, and make satisfaction for them, and obtain for them remission of sin and salvation? Or was all this designed for the elect only? Our opponents say the former was the object; we say the latter.

We do not enquire whether the death of Christ gives occasion to the imparting of some blessings even to reprobates. Because it is in consequence of the death of Christ, that the gospel is preached to all nations, that the gross idolatry of many heathen nations has been abolished, that the daring impiety of men is greatly restrained by the word of God; that multitudes of the human family obtain many and excellent blessings, though not saving gifts of the Holy Spirit. It is unquestionable that all these flow from the death of Christ, for there would have been no place for them in the church, unless Christ had died. The question is whether the suretyship, and satisfaction of Christ were, by the will of God and purpose of Christ, destined for every individual of Adam's posterity, as our opponents teach; or for the elect only, as we maintain.

We embrace this opinion for the following reasons. 1. The mission and death of Christ are restricted to a limited number, delineated under the character of the people of Christ, the sheep of Christ, his friends, the church, his body, &c. but it is no where extended to all men severally and collectively. Thus Christ* "is called Jesus, because he shall save his people from their sins." He is called the Saviour of his body. "The good shepherd who lays down

* Matt. i. 21.

† Eph. v. 23.

John x. 15.

« AnteriorContinuar »