-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/5a7bb7e347950d015d9378774e0a302d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=uzoRF0F7NwQNzUIXl5ZtEBrJvDWNWonViqLU7izKsaOr1fzRWAuoSvN9Mp6SDF2vvS92vKTGz5loiBYEKtzQjf8Cd%7ETv4MniSRwkIhBvVCCmiQumKcXh3T0tzYF8DiP-dls2BxT5j2Rlu%7EuRSOktBKrEcU%7E67QFHimTPbdeGHAgNaliARlAGwrR8ccFBr9EAmKhxfRfTIqx8dDvMk44Otej6yGFsPkcahi9MtyEsEOfCa8oveAybWufYypMFK8S9fwmVXKjPzk4hKu-EdVdOqqMDDFZ5DniX2BSZjnONLEJfN4KuEpMKwP6MY6sFAmVC4JuK7LNrUQO%7ERFUBRUC6sw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
483a75826e6765c06c64cb7de79ed0ff
PDF Text
Text
THE
CARDINAL DOGMAS OP CALVINISM
TRACED TO THEIR ORIGIN.
MATT.
M A C FIE.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Sixpence.
��THE CARDINAL DOGMAS OF CALVINISM
TRACED TO THEIR ORIGIN.
T is not my business at present to dogmatise. I
propose to submit to the reader a historical sketch,
rather than a doctrinal disquisition. A rational mind
finds the ground on which to reject orthodox dogmas
conclusive enough, in the fact that they are felt to be
at variance with reason. But it cannot fail to strengthen
the convictions which spring directly from the exercise
of common sense, to be assured that those convictions
are supported by history. The inductive method to be
applied here in disproving the doctrine of unconditional
and eternal election, may be applied with equal success
in demolishing, point by point, the entire system of
Calvinistic theology. Ex uno disee omnes.
It is much more rare to hear the repulsive dogmas
of Calvinism preached now than it was a quarter of a
century ago. They still linger, however, under a more
or less austere aspect in town and country. They are
publicly taught by not a few clergymen who received
them as a traditional inheritance, which they would
deem it sacrilegious to inquire narrowly into. They
are professed by many laymen also. Some of these
laymen have outlived Calvinism in heart, though they
are unable to muster the courage necessary to avow
their opinions openly; others of them, with yet less
independence of thought, cling to the system with
simply a blind sentimentalism which rests in the wor
ship of the past.
I
�4
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
The doctrine of eternal and unconditional election
would have no place in Calvinistic theology, but for the
alleged “fall” of Adam, and the supposed fatal conse
quences of this catastrophe to the human race. The
doctrine under notice represents God as foreseeing that
such an untoward event would happen, and as, in con
sequence, proposing in a past eternity to save a limited
portion of mankind from the eternal ruin which their
own sin directly, and the imputed sin of the first man
indirectly, should bring upon them. This deliverance
of the elect from the ceaseless punishment of hell, to
which the non-elect were exposed, was determined
upon by God unconditionally—one might almost say,
arbitrarily, according to Calvinism. The choice is
said to have been sovereign, absolute, spontaneous,__
without any perception on the part of Deity of’in
herent merit as distinguished from ill-desert in the
elected persons, in order that all pretext for their
taking any credit to themselves in the transaction
should be excluded, and that the unreasoning pre
ference of the infinite chooser might be vindicated
and extolled. The web of metaphysical exposition
that has been woven round this tenet of orthodoxy is
indescribably ingenious and complicated. The profound
treatises which have attempted to deal with the topic
during the last fourteen centuries, have been legion.
The controversies that have been waged all through
that period about it, are they not familiar to every
student of that most unsatisfactory branch of theolo
gical learning- Churcli History ? "Who can number
the honest minds that have been narrowed and twisted
by the dismal teaching of the creed of which this
doctrine is the central element!
The Pantheist is consistent and intelligible, however
strongly we may disagree with him, when he frankly
says that “he cannot frame to himself the conception
of a personal God j that he cannot understand sin as
real, but only as apparent in the universe, and that
�Traced to their Origin.
5
what physical and moral disorder exists no power can
remove, till, in the slow progress of events, the world
has gained sufficient scientific knowledge and experience
to swamp what we are accustomed to call wrong-doing
and folly. All error, absurdity, and evil work their own
cure by wearing themselves out. What we technically
call sin, marks the fact that mankind has on certain
matters to pass from a state of ignorance to a state of
knowledge.” This view may be right, or it may be
wrong, but it has at least the advantage of leaving out
all implied moral imputations upon the character of a
personal deity. The assertion that an intelligent God
predestined only a certain number to everlasting life
necessarily carries with it the anterior condition, that
he must have fated the circumstances which made that
predestination inevitable. Unless the Calvinist is pre
pared to believe that there is a devil in the universe
equally potent with the Almighty—a conception as im
possible as it is monstrous,-—he is bound to hold that
God deliberately arranged for corruption and death,
material, spiritual, and everlasting, to flood the world.
For without this supposition the theory of a media
torial ransom for the favourites of the Calvinistic deity
would be meaningless. I pass over the horrid but
necessary counterpart of the doctrine of the eternal and
unconditional election of some, namely, the eternal and
unconditional reprobation of others. With such a
representation of God constantly before the mind, the
Predestinarians must from the first have been unique
in the grounds of their reverence for their deity. Con
flict with reason could surely no further go than appears
in the spectacle of their professed devotion and affec
tion for his character and will, in spite of the crimes
and cruelties ascribed to him by their creed, which
traces to his agency and permission acts totally irreconcileable with the principles of human reason, right, and
benevolence. That there should be found in Europe
and America a section of civilised men venerating the
�6
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
Calvinistic God, despite characteristics in him which
would be denounced as intolerable if seen in a human
being, is itself an unanswerable reply to all the theolo
gical rant about the universality of human depravity.
If ever argument was wanting to retrieve the libelled
character of mankind, and atone for its imperfections,
it is abundantly supplied in the worship and consecra
tion shown by so many to the God of eternal and un
conditional election ! Never was the mantle of charity
so forbearingly thrown over the vices of man by man,
as has in this case been thrown over the vices of deity
by man.
The dogma under consideration is somewhat anachronously designated when associated with the name of
Calvin; The origin of the doctrine dates back just
eleven centuries before the Reformation, and, to no
earlier a period. Its real author was Augustine,
Bishop of Hippo, who flourished in the fifth century;
The system known as Calvinism is little more than a
revival of Augustinianism. A section of the Roman
Catholic Church in the time of the Genevan Reformed
had veered round into the track of practical Pelagianism, and in order to beat down what Calvin held to be
deadly error, he repaired to the armoury of Augustine,
and furbished up the old weapons of the saint to fight
over again the battle of Grace versus Works. The
question returned, “ Can man think or do any right
thing of himself ? ” “ Yes, certainly,” said the semi
Pelagian of Calvin’s day. “ No, nothing,” replied
Calvin, “ without the inspiration of the sovereign,
eternal, and electing grace of God.” The two postu
lates on which the entire predestinarian scheme, as
originated by Augustine, and revived by Calvin, rested,
were original sin inherited from Adam, and the irrespon
sible sovereignty of God. Prom these premises it was
plausibly argued by Augustine that “ an absolute
election of certain individuals to eternal life, though
resulting from the divine will purely, is not on the
�Traced to their Origin.
7
part of the supreme ruler abstractedly unjust. For
since, both by original and actual sin, all are trans
gressors of God’s law, it were assuredly no injustice if
all had been left to perish. Therefore, if all might
justly be left to perish, clearly no breach of justice can
be committed in the free election of some to eternal
life.” Strange metaphysical infatuation to blind a
great mind like Augustine’s ! What caused “ original
sin ? ” The predetermination of God. What caused
“ actual sin ? ” Proximately it miist have been original
sin. Therefore, for God to save a few sinners, and to
hold the rest responsible fortheir doom—-a doom which
could only be averted either by his predestinating that
sin should not enter in any shape into the world, or
by his exerting some irresistible influence in redeeming
the non-elect, is a palpable and cruel injustice. But
the exigencies of a theological system with a polemical
divine are vastly more urgent than any scruples about
the moral issues of the system. Consequently, Augus
tine, with all the partisan zeal of a retained counsel,
rushed blindly on in the narrow ruts of his scholasti
cism, and we need not be surprised, therefore, to read
these words of his respecting the elect and the repro
bate :—“ Although in the present state we cannot cer
tainly know the elect from the reprobate (for as
the reprobate may seem for a time to be leading holy
lives, so the elect, anterior to their effectual calling
may for a time appear to be in nowise actuated by
godliness), yet a definite number of individuals, as well
from among the existing members of the visible church
as from the great mass of the unbelieving world at
large, who shall hereafter become members of the
visible church, are, by the mere sovereign pleasure
of God, personally elected to eternal salvation.” So
strong a passage prepares us for one still stronger in
the same direction, written apparently under the in
fluence of a remorseless logic which utterly tramples
on the sentiments of even common humanity, to say
�8
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
nothing of deity. “ Since the number of the elect can
neither can be increased or diminished, all the rest of
mankind, equally by the mere sovereign pleasure of
God, being ultimately given over to the unrestrained
exercise of their own free will, are personally repro
bated to eternal damnation.”
In natural sequence to this terrific assertion we next
encounter the theory of “particular redemption,” the
necessity for which latter dogma previous links in the
chain of argument had created. “ When it is said,” says
Augustine, “that God will have all to be saved, though in
point of fact, all men are not saved, this language relates
exclusively to the elect, who, through God’s sovereign
pleasure are out of all classes of men predestined to
eternal life.” True to his favourite tenet of originale
pjeccatum, which he believed to involve the mass of men
in hopeless spiritual insensibility, Augustine summons
to his aid the correlated dogma of “ effectual calling ”
and dovetails it into his system. “ In due season,” he
says, “vrhile to the reprobate reproof acts only as a
penal torment, to the elect that same reproof is instru
mentally blessed as a salutary medicine.” Having
thus reasoned out to his own satisfaction the remote
and proximate causes of human depravity ; having set
forth the outward provision for the cure of this evil
which he tells us was expressly and exclusively
ordained for the benefit of the elect; having further
put forward the doctrine that the elect were supernaturally inspired with an inclination to appropriate
effectually the provided cure, only one more theological
extravagance was wanted to round off and cap this
dismal system. Augustine taught “the final perse
verance of all the elect through the indefectible grace
of God; ” that is to say, their safe conduct to heaven.
This synopsis of the bishop’s theory, stated for the
most part in Iris own words, covers all that need be
said now in the way of preliminary exposition.
It is not generally known, however, that the contem-
�Traced to their Origin.
9
poraries of Augustine rejected the views which I have
summarized, as “ novelties,” and demanded his authority
for dogmas so unheard of in the previous experience of
the church. But the following facts will enable us
to judge for ourselves the actual -worth of the testimony
he laboured to adduce in their support.
The first occasion on which he is known to have
promulgated his peculiar theories was in his contro
versy with Pelagius, Celestius, Julian, and their
followers, on “ Divine grace and human nature.” The
points at issue between the combatants are briefly as
follows: the Church asserted first that “ the grace of
God is not given according to man’s antecedent merits.”
Secondly, that “whatever may be the comparative
righteousness of one man in particular, no person lives
in this corruptible body without incurring the actual
guilt of a certain degree of positive sinfulness.”
Thirdly, that “we are all born obnoxious to the sin
of the first man, and consequently are all subject
to damnation unless the guilt which is contracted in
our generation be removed by our regeneration.”
These were the points stoutly argued by Augustine in
.behalf of the church. The Pelagians, on the contrary,
insisted that “we only sin by vicious imitation and
that grace is given according to antecedent merit.”
Augustine appealed in favour of his views—which all
orthodox people have done ever since—to the bible,*
* What orthodox ism cannot be proved from the bible?
It is on record that a Cambridge professor a century or two
back, got the notion into his head that the book of Psalms
could be interpreted throughout on a new hermeneutical
principle, viz.: that of rain. He solemnly believed and
maintained that the Psalmist had before his mind the idea of
moisture in composing every verse of his Psalms, and when
the Professor comes upon the beautiful words, “Light is
sown for the righteous • and gladness for the upright in
heart,” as might be expected, he canters easily over critical
difficulties. He gravely explains, “ Light was produced among
the Orientals by oil expressed from the castor tree, and the
castor tree was nourished and refreshed by rain!”
�io
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
as interpreted by the fathers, and in particular, as
interpreted by Polycarp (who was reported to have
received his theology direct from the Apostle John),
St Cyprian of Carthage, and his own personal friend
and patron, Ambrose of Milan.
In the course of the controversy Augustine was
induced to publish a treatise on “ Correction and
Grace ” for the purpose of crushing the heresy against
which he fought. This treatise contains theological
speculations never before elaborated in support of ortho
doxy. Id this work the doctrinal system now known
as Calvinism first saw the light, and the theories of unconditionalism and necessitarianism, now for the first
time propounded, were strongly objected to by the
author’s most intimate friends and denounced by the
great majority of Augustine’s orthodox contemporaries
as “novelties.”
When this work on “ Correction and Grace ” reached
Gaul, Augustine’s notions in the book which were ac
counted “novel” were openly opposed. Prosper of
Aquitane, formerly a disciple of the bishop of Hippo,
and Hilary of Arles remonstrated with Augustine in
letters which they addressed to him on the subject
in the name of the believers of Massilia. In one of
these epistles we are told that many of “ the servants
of Christ ” who lived in Marseilles and in other parts
of Gaul (the description is given by Prosper himself)
had instructed Prosper and Hilary to expostulate with
Augustine. The following are the words of the ex
postulation: “We heartily approve of your general
confutation of Pelagius and his followers. But why
do you superfluously mingle with it a system of novel
peculiarities which we cannot receive 1 [The reference
here is to the distinctive Augustinian dogmas of uuconditionalism and necessitarianism now known as the
fundamentals of Calvinistic theology.] To say nothing
of what we at least deem the utter inconsistency of
that system with scripture, it is, in truth, quite new
�Traced to their Origin.
ii
to us. We never even so much as heard of it before.
We find it unsanctioned by any of the preceding
fathers, and we perceive it to be contrary to the sense
of the whole Catholic church.” The weight attaching
to this communication of the Massalian believers con
sists in the fact that they were general admirers of the
bishop of Hippo, whom, in this instance, however, they
felt bound to take to task, and they were not likely to
be animated by silly prejudice against him. For the
letter referred to, concludes in these flattering terms :
“ Be assured, however, that, this one matter excepted,
we cordially admire your holiness both in all your
doings and in all your sayings.”
Now the gist of the inquiry turns upon this point:
were the suspicions of the Massilians as to Augustine’s
novelties well-founded ? If they were, clearly the
dogmas of unconditionalism and necessitarianism had
no existence within the knowledge of the orthodox
church prior to the Pelagian controversy.
The remonstrance of Prosper and Hilary called forth
from the irrepressible bishop a published defence of
the “ novel ” positions he had taken up, in a second
treatise entitled “The predestination of the Saints and
the gift of Perseverance.” How does he attempt to
vindicate himself from the charges brought against his
doctrine by the Christians of Marseilles ? He falls back
on two sources of proof: the authority of the Catholic
church, and the testimony of the preceding fathers,
though the Massilian Christians denied that support
could be found for his views either in the one quarter
or in the other. In reference to the former of these
sources of proof he admits that the church “ was not
wont to bring forward in preaching, the doctrine of
predestination, because formerly there were no adver
saries to answer.” But yet he maintains that “not
withstanding her habitual silence on the topic, she
must have held the doctodne in question because she
has always prayed that unbelievers might be converted
�12
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
to the faith and that het levers might persevere to the
end.” So much for church authority and Augustine’s
way of manipulating it!
Let us now see how he manages to manufacture en
couragement for his “ novelties ” out of the testimony
of the fathers. Strange to say, from the whole host
of them he can only find three names as pillars for the
fabric of his “ novel peculiarities : ” Cyprian, GregoryNazianzen, and Ambrose, and the only assistance his
ingenuity could extract from these fathers consists only
of a very few brief and extremely ambiguous passages
from their writings. From these few vague passages
he draws the sweeping inference that “ these all har
moniously teach his system of predestination.” He
had already based his necessitarian dogmas on the
plea that the church had held the doctrine of final
perseverance, forgetting, as he did, that such a doctrine
as that of final perseverance might be logically enough
held by persons who repudiated altogether the notion
of unconditional election and predestination. We shall
soon find that his appeal to the fathers is as meagre,
frivolous, and unsatisfactory, as his appeal to the autho
rity of the church. We may be quite sure, from the
vast array of ancient names he opposed to Pelagianism that had he been able to bolster up his predestinarian system, especially by patristic authority, he would
not have contented himself, as he felt compelled to do
in this instance, with naming only three solitary fathers
as favouring his side of the question.
Now for the testimony from the fathers which he
adduces. Cyprian, the first of the three cited by
Augustine, flourished about the middle of the third
century, and the two others—Gregory Nazianzen and
Ambrose—in the latter part of the fourth century,
the two last named fathers actually belonging to the
patristic generation immediately preceding his own. So
that, after all his boasted claims for the antiquity and
inspired authority of his theories, he relied upon fathers,
�Traced to their Origin.
13
the earliest of whom lived as late as a century and a
half, at least, after the death of St John, and the latest
of whom was only his own senior by about twenty
years.
Had these three fathers yielded any distinct support
to the Augustinian theories, we might have been dis
posed to lay less stress on their remoteness from the
Apostles. But the passages the bishop of Hippo brings
forward from their writings, are found to be utterly
irrelevant, and show the desperate shifts to which he
was driven in attempting to make out his case.
What says Cyprian, on this subject of eternal and
unconditional election 1 He simply prayed along with
the “ Church Catholic ” that “ infidels might be con
verted, and that believers might persevere to the end.”
‘‘Therefore,” concludes Augustine, “this father must
have held my sentiments respecting Election and Re
probation.” Could logic be more completely set at
defiance ?
Again, Gregory-Nazianzen, exhorting his flock to
confess the Trinity in Unity, stated that “ he who gave
them in the first instance to believe that doctrine would
also give them in the second instance to confess it.”
A conclusion similar to the one just indicated, is
instantly drawn also from these words. Gregory is
supposed to be at one with Augustine.
Ambrose said that “ when a man became a Christian
he might fairly allege his own good pleasure in so
doing, without, in anywise, denying the good pleasure
of God; for it is from God that the will of man is pre
pared, and Christ calls him whom he pities.”
For any man in his senses—and especially a man of
the unquestioned talent of Augustine—-to clutch at such
a pretence of proof as is afforded by this passage, of the
doctrines of unconditional election and reprobation—reveals an ignorance of the first principles of reasoning
perfectly astounding.
Another passage from the writings of the same
�14
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
father, is quoted by the Bishop of Hippo for the same
purpose. It occurs in a comment by Ambrose on a
certain verse in St Luke’s gospel. Ambrose expresses
himself thus : “ Learn, also, that Christ would not be
received by those whom he knew had not been con
verted in simplicity of mind. For if he had so pleased,
he might, from being undevout, have made them devout.
But why they did not receive him, the Evangelist him
self shows us, when he says, ‘ because his face was as of
one going to Jerusalem.’ For the disciples were wish
ing him to be received into Samaria. God calls them
whom he deigns to call, and him whom he wills he
makes religious.”
On these two statements of Ambrose unitedly,
Augustine, with touching simplicity, based the opinion
that this father and himself were agreed on necessitarian
doctrines. But, in point of fact, so far from Cyprian,
Gregory and Ambrose intending to lend any counte
nance to Augustinian “ novelties,” passages might easily
be adduced from the works of all three demonstrating
that they were flatly opposed to these novelties. But
even had their teachings been apposite to Augustine’s
purpose, when it is remembered that the very earliest
of these witnesses was not born till a hundred and fifty
years after the last of the Apostles, the value of their
testimony becomes seriously impaired.
There are one or two further considerations worthy to
be noted as supplying evidence that the origin of the
specious opinions of Augustine could only be traced to
himself.
After Augustine’s death, Prosper, who became a
convert to the dogmas of Augustinianism, and was
carried away by heroic loyalty to the memory of his
great teacher, continued to defend them zealously. This
being the case, an appeal was made to the judgment
of Pope Celestine on the subject, and that pontiff, while
commending the skill and earnestness of Augustine
in contending with the Pelagians for “ the doctrines of
�Traced to their Origin.
J5
grace,” significantly enough passed over in silence the
two elaborate treatises which develop his “novel” views,
viz., “ Correction and Grace,” and “The predestination
of the saints and the gift of perseverance.” The Pope,
sensible of the obligation under which the Church of
Pome was laid to the learning, ability, and devotion of
Augustine, was naturally unwilling to deal out formal
censure against his controverted opinions, and thus ex
pose his memory to reproach. Celestine and his suc
cessors, therefore, chose to evade the appeals made to
them to pronounce against the necessitarian dogmas of
the Bishop of Hippo. From an early preface to “ the
Predestination of the Saints and the gift of persever
ance,” we learn that, in the time of Leo the Great,
the dispute as to Augustine’s new views, was still un
settled in the church, and ultimately this pope adopted
the evasive method of referring it to the Council of
Orange, which sat in the year 441, that the Council
might bear the responsibility of gravely deliberating
and of finally deciding on the subject. It must be
candidly owned that the judges in this council were as
far removed from prejudice as men of their type and
times could possibly be, and yet they found Augustine’s
sentiments to be contrary to the most ancient and
authorised interpretations of the Bible, and though
they make no direct allusion to his “ novelties ” in the
first twenty-four canons framed by them, still, in the
closing canon, they assert in manifest opposition to
these novelties, that “ all baptised Christians may,
through grace, if they will only labour faithfully,
accomplish those things which appertain to their salva
tion, and that the doctrine of God’s predestination of
some certain individuals to evil is not only to be dis
believed, but also TO BE ANATHEMATISED WITH ALL
detestation.” The Council of Orange met expressly
to consider all matters relating to the Pelagian contro
versy, but nevertheless, when they had occasion to
mention the Augustinian dogmas in question, it was
�16
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
only to repudiate them. This Council searched, in
vain, the records of the four preceding Councils of the
church for support to the views of the Bishop of
Hippo, and were forced to the conclusion that these
views were at variance with the received articles of
the Catholic faith.
John Calvin appeared about eleven centuries after
Augustine, revived the 11 novelties ” of his great theo
logical master, and followed in the wake of his argu
ments. But, with clearer and more discriminating per
ceptions than the bishop seems to have had of the com
parative weight of patristic authority on the side of
predestinarian tenets, Calvin rejected the testimony of
two of Augustine’s witnesses—Cyprian and GregoryNazianzen—altogether on this head. But Calvin laid
special emphasis on the statements of Ambrose, as a
certain writer remarks, “ with more complacency than
fairness.” We have already seen that the citations
from this father are just as futile as a buttress for
Augustinianism or Calvinism, as are the citations from
the other two fathers mentioned above. Yet, with a
strange inconsistency, Calvin speaks as if the Bishop of
Hippo were united in opinion with all his ecclesiastical
predecessors and contemporaries ; for, says the Genevan
Reformer, “ Augustine does not suffer himself to be
disjoined from the rest, but, by clear testimonies, shows
that any such discrepancy from them as that with the
odium of which the Pelagians attempted to load him, is
altogether false. For out of Ambrose he cites : ‘ Christ
calls him whom he pities,’ and also, ‘ if He had pleased,
he might from undevout have made them devout; but
God calls those whom he deigns to call, and him whom
he wills, he makes religious.’ ”
So that in spite of Calvin’s assertion that Augus
tine was in harmony with the entire body of the
preceding fathers, he himself only ventures to quote
from one of them, for the obvious reason that he could
obtain no plausible show of aid from any of the rest;
�Traced to their Origin.
17
and the one brief passage he does cite is essentially
vague, and even inappropriate.
Again, with more zeal for his cause than pure regard
for fairness, Calvin attempts, in his remarks on this
subject, to produce the impression upon his readers
that the only persons who accused Augustine of error
were the Pelagians, whereas the plain truth is, that this
charge was made against him by individuals whom he
himself, on several occasions, addressed as “ Christians,”
and who were designated “servants of Christ” by his
disciple Hilary, as well as by the judicious Council of
Orange.
There is a further consideration of some importance
as bearing on the same point. In the reply which
Augustine sent to the letters of Prosper and Hilary,
when they wrote in the name of the Massilian Chris
tians, and expressed their surprise at his “ novel pecu
liarities ” (while approving his general confutation of
the Pelagians), the following passage occurs: “ Pro
vided they (j.e., the believers of Marseilles) walk in
such doctrines (viz., as those with which he opposed
the Pelagians), and pray to Him who giveth under
standing if they differ from us, He will also reveal this
to them ! ” In the whole of his epistle he never once
attempts to strengthen the faith of his wavering friends,
by supplementing the empty show of historical proof he
had before adduced, but takes the easy method—so fre
quently resorted to in all ages by ecclesiastics when in
similar straits—of making the acceptance of his dogmas
a test of their general fidelity to truth. If they walked
in the right path they would be sure to become dis
posed to embrace his novel tenets ! What does this
imply, but that with all the acquaintance of the Chris
tians of Marseilles with the historical foundations of
their faith, the favourite necessitarian theories of Augus
tine had never before been heard of by them !
I will mention a circumstance, in conclusion, which
stamps Augustine, beyond the possibility of doubt, as
�18
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
the originator of the cardinal points of the system more
recently known as Calvinism. This father distinctly
avers in the treatise, “ The Predestination of the Saints,”
that he had “diligently searched it (his necessitarian
system) out and discovered it,” and frankly owns that
there was a time when he had maintained entirely dif
ferent opinions. But if, as he elsewhere holds, these
peculiarities were recognised as orthodox by the Chris
tian Church in his day and before it, with what con
sistency can he be said to have diligently searched them
out and discovered them? Besides, if they were not
new in the theological world, how comes it that none
of his religious compeers had happened to hear of them
previous to the Pelagian controversy, and that it was
so difficult for him to find a single definite passage favour
ing his views in the writings of preceding fathers 1
Such is a brief, but, as I cannot help believing, a
convincing summary of the facts connected with the
rise and progress of what still passes under the name
of Calvinistic theology. The father who has been
justly credited with the paternity of the system was
a superior type of the class of controversial theoi gians who have become distinguished in church his
tory. He inherited the fiery temper of his father,
blended with something of the gentleness and dreamy
piety for which his mother was remarkable. Up to
manhood he held aloof from dogmatic fetters of all
kinds, and gave his mind to bold and free thought*
in all directions, equally proof against the influence of
bribes on the one hand, and of threats on the other.
He had mastered in his twentieth year, by his own
efforts, as he tells us, “ omnes libros artium quos libe_ * As an instance of the once rationalistic tendency of Augus
tine’s mind, we find the following indisputably theistic senti
ment in his writings : Res ipsa quae nunc Religio Christiana
nuncupatur, erat apud antiquos, nee defuit ab initio generis
humani, quousque Christus veniret in carnem unde vera Reli
gio quae jam erat, ccepit appellari Christiana.—(Awpwsi. Retr.,
�Traced to their Origin.
r9
rales vocant,” but the organising and logical attributes
of his mind inspired him specially with a love of Aris
totle, and soon inclined him strongly towards the Manichseans. After a time he made the acquaintance of
Ambrose, bishop of Milan, and under the influence of
the bishop’s kindness, eloquence; and piety, Augustine
was induced to renounce Manichseanism. But it was
not till he had long struggled in the abysses of scepti
cism that he received Christianity, and was baptised.
His aspiring and unquiet spirit, ever panting for some
high occasion to put its powers on tension; seized the
opportunity offered by the heresy of Pelagius to render
eminent service to the church, and achieve fame in de
feating the heresiarch. The germ of fatalism which
had been nourished in him under Manichaeanism was
singularly developed in the heat of controversy. In
fact, his supreme effort consisted of incorporating fatal
ism with the dogmas of the church But in the learn
ing requisite to trace the history of church dogmas, as
well as in the patience of an inductive student, he
was essentially wanting. He understood the Latin
language, and had read extensively in it ; but with
much naivett he states that he “ hated the Greek,”
probably owing to its being to him a foreign tongue,
and to the fact of the harshness of his teacher, who
enforced his lessons “ saevis terroribus ac poenis.” Of
Hebrew he knew absolutely nothing.
Calvinism, or, more -correctly, Augustinianism, has
cropped up on four successive occasions in the history
of religious controversy, and each time has been asso
ciated for a while with intense religious activity. In
the fourth century, the attempt to unravel the alleged
eternal decrees of a personal God brought together on
one side Augustine, Fulgentius, and othersj and on the
other side Chrysostom; Ambrose, and other bishops of
the Greek and Latin Churches. Next, the necessitarian
dogmas of Augustine were the subject of keen debate
among the Schoolmen, and were long the cause of bitter
�2o
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
strife between the Franciscan and Dominican orders.
Again, at the Reformation, there was a diversity of
opinion on the subject of divine predestination. Calvin,
Reza, and Knox, defended the Augustinian view; and.
Luther, Erasmus, Melancthon, Bullinger, Sacerius, Lati
mer, and other leaders of the Reformed faith, op
posed it.
At the end of the seventeenth century, that ten
dency to rationalism set in, which, in the course of
a generation or two, swept 6ver all Europe. This
change in theological thought was largely due in Eng
land to the inductive method of inquiry applied to
science by Newton in his Principia, and applied to
psychology by Locke in his Essay; both of which
works, finished in the same year, inaugurated an epoch,
not only in the history of science and literature, but
also of theology. In Germany a similar sceptical spirit
was developed by the works of Leibnitz. In France
the rebound from church faith to human reason culmi
nated in Voltaire and the Encyclopaedists. In this in
fluence of inductive science and inductive philosophy
we have a remarkable illustration of the superior
potency of these two agencies as compared with theo
logy. There is no instance on record since the induc
tive method was first propounded by Bacon, of science
and philosophy following theology. On the other
hand, for all the progress theology has made and is
making towards truth, courage, and freedom, it is solely
indebted to the inoculating power of philosophy and
science. The stern aspect of dogma gradually becomes
softened in an age distinguished for scientific research
and philosophic analysis ; but theology has no influence
in moulding science and philosophy. The wave of free
thought just referred to overtook all evangelical churches
throughout Europe, and a real though unavowed Arian
ism prevailed among the Lutherans of Germany, the
Calvinists of Switzerland, the Reformed Church of
Holland, the Established Churches of England and
�Traced to their Origin.
Q. I
Scotland, the Presbyterians of Ireland, and even the
English Evangelical Dissenters. Beligious fervour
throughout the whole of Protestant Christendom was
in consequence wholesomely moderated by the rational
istic spirit which then predominated.
It was in recoil from “ moderatism ”—as the sober
religious condition of this period was called—that
Augustinianism for the fourth time revived. Vice and
sensuality abounded in the masses of the people; the
middle class, as a rule, were indifferent about the dogmas
and ceremonies of the church, and thus an opening was
made for some stern dealing with the universal religious
indifferentism that existed. Hence arose the “Pietists”
of Germany, the “ Evangelicals ” of England, and the
followers of Jonathan Edwards in America. These
parties made a capital point of “ personal ” and “ sub
jective” religion. The adherents of- Whitfield and
Wesley equally did so. But, for a while at least, the
Calvinistic dogmas of Edwards, Whitfield, and Simeon
took a deeper hold of the “ low church party ” north
and south of the Tweed, and of the Evangelical Non
conformists than the Arminianism of Wesley did. All
the old terrorism of threatened fire and brimstone against
the “unbeliever,” and of the restricted provision of “sal
vation ” for “ the elect; ” all the mystery of “predestina
tion,” “ reprobation,” and “ irresistible grace,” was once
more brought to bear in order to awe the penitent, and
narrow the way to heaven. The temptations to sin and
eternal death were represented as many and strong, and
the chances of being saved as few and weak 1 Under this
latest phase of Calvinism religion became a dismal
business, and up till recently it has in general con
tinued to be so, wherever “ the doctrines of grace ”
have been logically held by the orthodox. The altered
phase of religious controversy within the last twenty
years is the accident that mainly keeps Calvinistic
dogmas in the background. But these dogmas have
not yet died out. "They are still avowed, however
�22
The Cardinal Dogmas of Calvinism
tacitly, by a considerable section of the religious
world, and a certain school of professional religious
teachers are still expected, by way of saving their
theological reputation, now and then to declare their
belief in them. But the day of Calvinism, as a theo
logical power, is nearly over. It is at best but a
metaphysical relic of the dark ages, and has no mission
to the strongest minds of the present, far less to the
ordinary minds of the future. Like most other ques
tions capable of being treated inductively, theology is
now dealt with from its historical side. Even highchurchmen are faintly imitating the inductive method in
their inquiries, for they profess to go back to the early
fathers for their faith and their ceremonials. The
doctrines of the Reformation professed by the “ Evan
gelicals ” are too modern and uncertain for high church
acceptance. High-churchmen ground their very reasons
for receiving the authority of the Bible on the traditions
of the church. Theological sceptics are pursuing a
similar course, only with a more unbiassed and un
sparing historical analysis. These last claim the right
of searching out the history of The Canon of Scrip
ture itself as well as the history of the church, and of
rejecting whatever asserted facts cannot stand the test of
rational consistency, and produce satisfactory evidential
vouchers in their favour. The biblical criticism of to
day is not of the flimsy character of “ Paley’s Evi
dences ” or “ Lardner’s Credibility of Gospel History.”
These works are now impotent and effete, as far as they
claim to prove a supernatural Christianity. Paley and
Lardner now seem antiquated indeed, in defending the
dogma of New Testament infallibility on the plea that
some scraps of passages contained in Irenaeus and Justin
Martyr-resemble certain sayings in the Gospels. Tradi
tional authority in the matter of churches and doctrines
is now with all independent and cultured minds a thing
of the past, and only statements in the “ Canon ” which
will bear the sifting of modern historical criticism and
�'Traced to their Origin.
23
dispassionate reason are accepted as true by enlightened
scholars. No array of tradition or gush of sentiment
can possibly supply the deficiency of historical evidence.
For “supernatural Christianity,” as a historical system,
must stand or fall by historical tests. Dogmatic theo
logy is fast being relegated to the last resting-place of
exploded superstitions. The intellectual power and
spiritual life of civilized communities in the future will
be nourished and developed from a totally different
source. Theological dogma, with the countless figments
of the priestly brain, will be superseded by the inspi
ration of devout genius, the manifold discoveries of
science in the realms of material and spirit life, and by
the universal religion of the moral intuitions, another
name for which is The Religion of Humanity.
TURNBULL AND SPEAKS, PKINTEBS, BDINBUKGH.
��RECENT THEOLOGICAL ADDRESSES.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The cardinal dogmas of Calvinism traced to their origin
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Macfie, Matthew
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 23 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1873?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT162
Subject
The topic of the resource
Calvinism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (The cardinal dogmas of Calvinism traced to their origin), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Calvinism
Conway Tracts
Dogma