Page

ARTICLE XVII.

OF PREDESTINATION AND ELECTION.

I. THE QUESTION AND THE PRINCIPAL OPINIONS WHICH HAVE

BEEN HELD UPON IT, ARE STATED.

213

Ist. The opinion of the Supralapsarians.

2nd. The opinion of the Sublapsarians.

3rd. The opinion of the Remonstrants.

4th. The opinion of the Socinians.

II. THE HISTORY OF THE RISE AND PROGRESS OF THE CON-

TROVERSY.

III. THE ARGUMENTS BY WHICH THE DIFFERENT OPINIONS

3.)

ARE SUPPORTED.

Ist. The arguments of the Supralapsarians.

1. God's decrees are absolute. For,

(1.) Conditionate decrees imply imperfection ; and

(2.) They involve a contradiction.

2. There are two decrees, of election and reprobation.

(1.) There is a decree of election.

1.) Proved from facts.

2.) from analogy

from the confessions of their adversaries.

4.) from Scripture.

(2.) There is a decree of reprobation. Rom. ix. 17.

Ex. iv. 21. Rom. i. 26. Jude 4.
Objections refuted.
3. The consequences of these decrees.
(1.) The grace of God is of itself efficacious.

1.) Proved from the glory of God.
2.)

the manner of our prayers.
3.)

the language of Scripture.
Objections refuted.
(2.) Christ died only for the elect. For,

1.) The contrary assertion is absurd.
2.) He intercedes for none others.

Objections refuted.

Page

3.) The elect must finally persevere.

James i. 18.

Heb. xiii. 5.

4. These decrees are consistent with free agency.
2nd. The arguments of the Sublapsarians.

(Nearly coincide with the preceding.)
3rd. The arguments of the Remonstrants.
1. God's decrees are not absolute. For,

(1.) They contradict his justice.
(2.) They contradict bis holiness.
(3.) They contradict his truth.
(4.) They contradict his sincerity.
(5.) They imply that he is the author of sin.

Objections of the Supralapsarians refuted.

Prescience of future contingents is certain.

(1.) Proved from prophecy.

(2.)

from examples.

(3.) It is consistent with God's perfection ; and

(4.) It does not involve a contradiction.
2. There are no decrees of election and reprobation.

Objections re.uted.

3. Grace is not irresistible. For,

(1.) It destroys responsibility.

(2.) It annihilates exertion.

(3.) It contradicts experience.

(4.) It frustrates all exhortations.

(5.) It is opposed to Scripture.

Objections refuted.

4. Christ died for all men.

(1) From Scripture.

(2.) From the obligation to believe in him.

5. The elect must not finally persevere.

Rev. ii. 10.

Heb. vi. 4. X. 26. Ez. xviii. 24.

4th. The arguments of the Socinians ;

(Are selected from the preceding.)
General observations.

Page

IV. What DOCTRINE MUST BE HELD BY THEM WHO SUB-

SCRIBE THIS ARTICLE.

1. It discountenances the Supralapsarian.

2. It favours the Calvinistic. For,

(1.) It asserts the efficacy of grace.

(2.) Its cautions may relate to that opinion.

3. It is not inconsistent with the Remonstrant. For,

(1.) The decree may be absolute or conditional.

(2.) Its cautions may relate to that opinion.

(3.) The other offices of the Church favour that opinion.

ARTICLE XVIII.

OF OBTAINING SALVATION ONLY BY THE NAME

OF CHRIST.

I. AS TO THOSE TO WHOM THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION HAS

BEEN REYEALED.

267

II. AS TO THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HEARD OF THAT RELIGION.

1. Whether they can be saved ?

(1.) The affirmative is implied in Scripture. Rom. ii. 12.

X. 14. Acts, x. 34.

(2.)

proved from reason.
2. How they shall be saved ? Acts iv. 2.

ARTICLE XIX.

273

OF THE CHURCH.

I. SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERM “ CHURCH."

1st. Doctrine of the Roman Catholics.

1. It is not proved by miracles.

2. Nor by Scripture.

3. Nor by particular marks.

2nd. The doctrine of the Article.

Objections refuted.

II. PARTICULAR CHURCHES HAVE ERRED.

The Church of Rome has erred.

b

Page

1. Proved by the sense of antiquity.

2.

facts.

3.

Scripture. (Objections refuted.)

4.

the difficulties which would attend a contrary

opinion.

ARTICLE XX.

306

OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH.

1. The POWER OF THE CHURCH.

1. To decree rites.

(1.) Proved by the tenor of Scripture. Rom. xiv. 19.

1 Cor. xiv. 40.

(2.)

example of our Saviour.

(3.)

changes already made.

(4.)

conduct of the Apostles.

2. It has authority in matters of faith.

(1.) Proved by analogy.

(2.)

the example of the Apostles.

II. THE LIMITS OF THIS POWER.

1. With respect to rites.

2.

matters of faith.

ARTICLE XXI.

OF THE AUTHORITY OF GENERAL COUNCILS.

I. THE PERSONS WITH WHOM TAE Power Of CALLING COUN-

CILS IS LODGED.

321

1. The doctrine of the Article is proved from Scripture.

2.

the dangers of a

contrary practice.

3.

the practice of

antiquity.

II. The FALLIBILITY OF GENERAL COUNCILS.
1. Proved from our ignorance as to the properties which con-

Page

2. Proved from our ignorance as to the manner in which they

must proceed.

authority of their de-

3.

crees.

the reception of their

decrees.

5.

the contradictions of different councils.

6.

the intrigues practised in them.

7.

the practice of the early ages.

the present state of the world.

Objections refuted.

8.