sense, they said, could not be that in which they were condemned, and, therefore, they signed the condemnation of them; at the same time asserting, that they were not to be found in Jansenius's book in the sense ascribed to them. Hence arose the celebrated controversy between the Jesuits and Jansenists, whether the Pope was infallible, not only in matters of faith, but even in matters of fact. The former maintained the affirmative, and the latter the negative. At last a new cessation of hostilities was agreed on, and the controversy has since, in some measure, been extinguished.

Among the reformed Churches, a similar diversity of opinion prevails. Luther at first held the complete slavery of the will; afterwards,a however, he seems to have changed his mind, for though he never publicly owned it, still he expressed his approbation of a work written by Melancthon, in which the latter declares a similar alteration in his own views. His followers, of late years, however, seem to have adopted the Semipelagian doctrines. Calvin, on the contrary, embraced the Supralapsarian opinions, in which

This point is fully discussed in Archb. Laurence's Bampton Lectures, ser. 4. p. 94., and note (14.)

b It has been doubted, whether Calvin coincided with the opinions of the Supralapsarians. The familiarity subsisting between him and Theodore Beza, "notwithstanding their difference on this point," is particularly urged by Twiss as an instance of the good will that pervades the Calvinistic Churches. See Vindic. 1. 1. part. 1. digr. 1. sec. 4.

he was followed by Beza, and most of the reformed Churches on the Continent, though on this point a great latitude is allowed.

In England, the first reformers were favourable to the Sublapsarian hypothesis. Some years after Perkins wrote in defence of the Supralapsarians, and was answered by Arminius, Professor of Divinity at the University of Leyden, which gave rise to several disputes between the latter and his colleague Gomarus. At the same time, the Prince of Orange was eager for carrying on the war with Spain, in which he was seconded by the opposers of Arminius, and disapproved by his followers. The Prince, therefore, favoured the former, and called a Council at Dort, in 1618, to decide the question. In this Synod the Arminians were condemned, while the other differences were left undetermined.c

These disputes were soon introduced into England the Abbots adhered to St. Austin's doctrine, while the Armenian tenets were warmly espoused by Archbishop Laud.d These, however,

a Perkins was born in Warwickshire, in the year 1558, and was a fellow of Christ's College, Cambridge.

b See Brandt's History of the Reformation in the Low Countries, v. 3. B. 33.

с

The differences here alluded to, between the Supralapsarian and Sublapsarian doctrines, can scarcely be said to have been left undetermined. The Synod seems to favour the latter doctrine. See Acta Synod. Dord. Art. 1. prop. 12.

See Hume's Hist. of England, v. 6. p. 287.

were not generally received, owing to the party which embraced them having sided with the king against the parliament. Some time after,a Twiss wrote in defence of the Supralapsarian hypothesis, which was not, however, commonly adopted. The Arminian doctrines were then again introduced, and no political reasons preventing their reception, they were more generally followed.

III. We proposed to state the arguments by which these opinions are supported.

1st. We shall consider the opinion of the Supralapsarians.

As the arguments by which this opinion is supported, are very numerous, it will conduce much to a clear understanding of the subject, by dividing the doctrine into its separate parts, and classifying those arguments according to their design. We shall, therefore, consider the question in the following method:

1. As to the nature of God's decrees. 2. As to the existence of certain decrees. 3. As to the consequences of those decrees. 4. The consistency of them with the free-will of man.

1. As to the nature of God's decrees. Supralapsarians hold, that all his decrees are absolute. This they prove by two arguments : (1.) Conditionate decrees imply imperfection.

See Wordsworth's Biog. v. 5. p. 546.

b See Turretin's Inst. Theol. L. 4.

The foundation on which they proceed, is that God is essentially perfect and independent in all his acts, so that he designs all things with reference to himself and his own glory. If, therefore, he were to suspend his decrees till he sees how free agents will choose to act, he should thus be made to form them in dependence on his creatures; a result which denies perfection." Accordingly, they hold, that as infinite wisdom must always begin its designs in that which is to come last in the execution of them; and as the conclusion of all things at the last day will be the manifestation of God's attributes; so we must suppose that manifestation was designed first in the order of his ideas, and that in subordination to it, all the resolutions respecting mankind were subsequently made.

(2.) The foundation on which they depend involves a contradiction. The foundation of conditionate decrees depends on the certain prescience of future contingents. Now this, they say, involves a contradiction. For if things are certainly foreseen, they must certainly be; so that the former assertion destroys their contingency. Thus, if any thing is certainly foreseen by God,

This is their main position. See Twiss, Vind. grat. Dig. 1. sec. 4. § 3.

b See Edwards on the Freedom of the Will, Part. 2. sec. 12. P. 161.

then it cannot be said that it is possible for that thing to happen otherwise. Again, God only foresees things, as he has himself previously decreed them. A prescience, therefore, antecedent to his decrees, cannot be admitted.

2. As to the existence of certain decrees. Supralapsarians hold, that there are two, election and reprobation.

(1.) That God has made a decree of election. This they support by the following arguments:

1.) From facts. We plainly see that, comparatively, few can be saved. It therefore follows, that God must have willed the salvation of this number only. For if he willed that all men should be saved, it would seem as if he wished for an event which he was not able to produce; whereas infinite perfection can wish for nothing which it cannot execute, and if it is fit to wish it, it is also fit to execute it.

2.) From analogy. For many ages the world was given up to idolatry, and even since the promulgation of Christianity, that idolatry has continued in vast tracts of it. Other countries are fallen into Mahometanism, and in parts of Christendom itself, religion is so much corrupted, that we must confess, that the greater part of mankind are left destitute of the means of grace.

If, then, God thus leaves whole nations in darkness, and freely selects others to communi