Calvinism. 3. Mankind are totally depraved in consequence of the fall; and by virtue of Adam's being their public head, the guilt of his sin was imputed and a corrupt nature conveyed to all his posterity, from which proceed all actual transgression, and by sin we are made subject to death and all miseries, temporal, spiritual and eternal. 4. All whom God has predestinated to life, he is pleased, in his appointed time, effectually to call by his Articles of the Church. Art. 9. Original sin standeth 10th. The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength, and good works, to faith, and calling upon God: wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and ac since man in consequence of his natural corruption, is incapable either of thinking or doing any good thing: and therefore it is necessary to his conver sion that he be regenerated, and renewed by the operaation of the Holy Ghost, which is the gift of God through Jesus Christ. 4. Divine grace or the energy of the Holy Ghost, begins and perfects every thing that can be called good Bishop, it seems, was obliged to travel out of the literal and grammatical sense of the article, in order to accommodate it to Calvinism, while the Scotch deputy, having the explicit language of his church to favour him, needed no such finesse. See White's Comparative Views, vol. ii. p. 66. Articles of the Church. ceptable to God, without the 16th. Not every deadly sin, willingly committed after baptism, is sin against the Holy Ghost and unpardonable. Wherefore the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after baptism. After we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin; and by the grace of God (we may) arise again and amend our lives. And therefore they are to be condemned who say that they can no more sin so long as they live here, or deny the place of forgiveness to such as truly repent. [The Puritans, at the Hampton Court Conference in 1604, required that the words-yet neither totally nor finally-should be inserted after, may fall into sin. This, however, which would have made this article Calvinistic, was refused them. Arminianism. in man, and, consequently, all good works are to be attributed to God alone nevertheless, this grace is offered to all, and does not force men to act against their inclinations, but may be resisted, and rendered ineffectual by the perverse will of the impenitent sin < E It will be seen by the reader that the two doctrines of the depravity of human nature, and predestination unto life, are not peculiar to either creed, but are held by all though differently expressed in each. The doctrines of irresistible grace, of the perseverance of the saints, and of particular redemption, are found only in the Calvinistic system, and are more or less distinctly opposed in the others. We shall now allege some facts to show, that the Articles of the Church have never been considered by those best qualified to judge, to be clearly Calvinistic. That the articles have not been considered as possess. ing this character is shown: 1. By the dispute at Oxford in 1595, which seems to have been on a point similar to that now before us, to settle which on the principles of Calvinism, Archbishop Whitgift drew up and sent as "the undoubted sense of the Church of England," the famous Lambeth Articles, some of which, in our opinion, are rather inconsistent with the articles of the church. Besides, to use the language of Bishop White, "what occasion was there for them if their sense had already been declared in the Thirty-nine ?"* 2. By the fact that they were adopted by the Church of Ireland in 1634, through the influence of Archbishop Laud whose principles are acknowledged on all hands to have been anti-calvinistic.† *Comparative Views, vol. ii. p. 174.-et seq. † A set of articles drawn up by Archbishop Usher had previously been adopted by the Irish church, but Archbishop Laud succeeded in having them rejected, and the Thirty-nine introduced. R. Adam's Religious World, vol. ii. p. 369. 3. By the fact that the Westminister Assembly of (Calvinistic) Divines, which sat in 1643, rejected the Thirty-nine Articles; and drew up a new system, in which great precision was used on the points peculiar to Calvinism. 4. By the declaration of King Charles I. annexed to the English articles, that "in those curious points, in which the present differences of men lie, men of all sorts take the articles to be for them."* 66 5. By the "Dissenters reasons for separating from the Church of England," drawn up by Dr. Gill, an eminent Calvinistic Baptist. In the fourth reason, referring to the articles, it is said, they are very defective in many things: there are no articles relating to the two covenants of grace and works ; to creation and providence; to the fall of man; the nature of sin, and the punishments for it; to adoption, effectual vocation; sanctification, faith, repentance and the final perseverance of the saints; nor to the law of God; Christian liberty; church government and discipline; the communion of the saints, the resurrection of the dead, and the last judgement." 6. In the Liturgy proposed to be adopted by the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church "Though some differences have been ill raised, yet we take comfort in this, that all clergymen within our realm have always, most willingly subscribed to the articles established: which is an argument to us that they all agree in the true, usual, and literal, meaning of the said articles, and that even in those curious points, in which the present differences of men lie, men of all sorts take the articles to be for them." This is a very distinct reference to the Calvinistic and Arminian controversy. See also Bishop White's Comparative Views, vol. ii. p. 182. yet held in Philadelphia in 1785, the articles were reduced in number to twenty, and were somewhat altered, certainly without any additional bias to Calvinism, and in the preface, where an account of the alterations is given, it is said, "the articles of religion have been reduced in number, yet it is humbly conceived that the doctrines of the Church of England, are preserved entire; as being judged perfectly agreeable to the gospel.” 7. It has been publickly asserted, and never yet denied, that in the General Convention, which, in 1801 unanimously adopted the Articles as they now stand, there was not a single person, who either held the peculiar doctrines of Calvin, or who understood the Articles as supporting them.* 8. The Protestant Episcopal Church of Scotland, on being admitted to the benefits of toleration, was required to adopt the Thirty-nine Articles. The clergy accordingly subscribed them in a general Convocation at Lawrencekirk in 1804; and they subscribed them, “ 1 believe," says Adam, " to a man in the anti-calvinistic sense.t 9. The Reviewer concedes that "a great majority of the clergy of the English church both in Europe and America is understood to entertain sentiments the opposite of those of Calvin," and "yet to these articles in entering on their office they give in the most solemn manner their assent." And the editors of the Edinburgh En * Six only of the members of the Convention, which in 1785 set forth the "proposed book," were members of that in 1801. Two states not represented in the former, were in the latter; and two states represented in the former were not in the last. Considerable opportunity was thus afforded for diversity of opinion, † R. Adam's Religious world, vol. ii, p. 425. |