Musculus:

1) The Schoolmen do call Satisfaction the work of Penance, enjoined by the Priest after the Auricular confession. And here they make much ado, that the satisfaction on be neither less nor lighter than countervailing the weight of the sin. This doctrine of satisfaction does exceedingly darken the clearness of the grace of Christ: it does make men’s conscience either falsely assured, when they suppose that they have satisfied: either it does piteously torment them, when they cannot tell by what time they have satisfied in the sight of God for one sin: much less all their sins. Besides that it has opened not one gap but all doors, windows, arches, &c., to the Popes market, to gain pagan pardons; and for the traffic of Priests masses, to deliver souls out of Purgatory. Wherefore all godly do worthy abhor it. The doctrine of the Gospel does denounce unto us pardon of our sins, by the blood of Christ, by the shedding whereof, there is satisfaction made, not only for ours, but for the sins also of the whole world. Wolfgangus Musculus, Common Places of Christian Religion, trans., by Iohn Merton (London: Imprinted by Henry Bynneman, 1578), 528-529.

2) II To Whom Sins be forgiven.

If we consider of them which do purchase the forgiveness of their sins by the grace of God, there is but a small number of them, even as it is of the elect in respect of the reprobate, whose sins be withhold for evermore. But we seek not here to whom this grace of forgiveness does befall, but rather to whom it is to be taught and set forth. We can not here appoint upon any certain persons, to whom only this forgiveness of sins is to be preached. All men be generally called unto it, both Jews and Greeks, learned and unlearned, wise and foolish, rich and poor, old and young, men and women. For like as God enclosed all under unbelief that he might have mercy upon all, so he will have this grace of his mercy to be set forth to all men: “So God loved the world,” (says our Saviour), “that he gave his only begotten son, that everyone which believes in him should not perish, but have life everlasting.” And in the first epistle of John, we read this: “But in case any man do sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just, and he is the propitiation not for our sins, and for our sins only, but for the sins also of the whole world. I think that there is meant by the world, all mankind, by which the world does consist, from the beginning of it, until the end. Therefore when it is said, that God gave his son for the world, and that he is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world” what else is meant, but that the grace of forgiveness of sins is appointed unto all men, so that the Gospel thereof is to be preached unto all creatures? In this respect the gentle love of GOD towards man is set forth unto us to be considered, whereby he would not have any to perish, but all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. But for all that, this general grace has some conditions going withal, of which we will speak hereafter. Wolfgangus Musculus, Common Places of Christian Religion, trans., by Iohn Merton (London: Imprinted by Henry Bynneman, 1578), 577-8.

Consensus Tigurinus:

IV. Christ, Priest and King,

We must therefore regard Christ in His flesh as a Priest, who has expiated our sins by His death, the only Sacrifice, blotted out all our iniquities by His obedience, procured for us a perfect righteousness, and now intercedes for us that we may have access to God; as an expiatory Sacrifice whereby God was reconciled to the world; as a Brother, who from wretched sons of Adam has made us blessed sons of God; as a Restorer (Reparator), who by the power of His Spirit transforms all that is corrupt (vitiosum) in us, that we may no longer live unto the world and the flesh, and God himself may lire in us; as a King, who enriches us with every kind of good, governs and preserves us by His power establishes us with spiritual arms, delivers us from every evil, and restrains and directs us by the sceptre of His mouth; and He is to be so regarded, that He may lift us up to Himself, very God, and to the Father, until that shall be fulfilled which is to be at last, that God be all in all. John Calvin, “The Consensus Tigurinus: The Formula Consensus Helvetica,” in AA Hodge, Outlines of Theology, 652.

Latin: 4. Christus sacerdos. Christus Rex.

Ita Christus in carne sua considerandus est nobis sacerdos, qui peccata nostra unico mortis suae sacrificio expiavit, qui omnes nostras iniquitates delevit sua obedientia, qui perfectam nobis iustitiam comparavit, qui nunc intercedit pro nobis, ut accessus nobis ad Deum pateat. Considerandus est tanquam victima expiatrix, qua placatus est Deus mundo. Considerandus est frater, qui nos ex miseris Adae filiis effecit beatos Dei filios. Considerandus est reparator, qui spiritus sui virtute reformat quicquid in nobis est vitiosum, ut mundo vivere desinamus et carni, ac deus ipse in nobis vivat. Considerandus est Rex, qui omni bonorum genere nos ditat, qui nos gubernat sua virtute, ac tuetur, qui spiritualibus nos armis instruit, ut adversus diabolum et mundum invicti stemus qui nos ab omni noxa liberat, qui oris sui sceptro nos moderatur ac regit. Atque ita considerandus, ut ad se Deum verum, et patrem nos evehat, donec impleatur illud, quod tandem futurum est, nempe, ut sit Deus omnia in omnibus.

[Note: It looks very apparent that the Beveridge English translation of this simply leaves out the critical line: “as an expiatory Sacrifice whereby God was reconciled to the world.”]

Calvin:

Sermons:

1) Following that, since it is so that God willed that His Son might be thus exposed to death, may we not be ashamed of what He endured. May we not think that wicked men were in control and that the Son of God did not have the means to defend Himself. For everything proceeded from the will of God, and from the immutable decree which He had made. That is also why our Lord Jesus says in St. Luke, “Indeed, it is your reign now, and the power of darkness, As if He said, “Take no glory in what you are doing; for the devil is your master.” However, He shows that it is by means of the permission which God gave them. Although the devil possessed them, nevertheless, neither they nor he could attempt anything unless God had unleashed for them the bridle. That, then, in summary, is how we must have our eyes and all our senses fixed upon the will of God, and upon His eternal plan, when the death and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ is spoken of to us. Now He declares that such is the will of God, because it is written. For if Jesus Christ had not had testimony of what was ordered by God His Father, He might still have been in doubt. But He knew His office. God did not send Him here below that He might not have given Him fully to His express charge. It is true, inasmuch as our Lord Jesus is eternal God, He did not need to be taught by any Scripture; but inasmuch as He is our Redeemer and that He clothed Himself in our nature to have a true brotherhood with us, He had to be taught by Holy Scripture, as we see, above all, that He did not refuse such instruction. So then, since God has shown Him to what He was called, that is upon what He relies. That is why He is taken as a captive, in order not to draw back when He knew that He had to achieve the charge which was committed to Him, that is, to offer Himself in sacrifice for the redemption of us all.

So, then, we must learn that, inasmuch as the will of God is secret to Himself and incomprehensible, we must have recourse to Holy Scripture. It is true that God does not cease to have His counsel ordered by things that we imagine to be by chance. But that is not declared to us. We shall not always have special revelation to say that God has determined this or that. Then, we must withhold judgment. That is why we pray to God that He may heal us of an illness or that He may deliver us from some other affliction when we have fallen into it. And why? We do not know what He wills to do. To be sure, we ought not to impose a law upon Him. This condition ought always to be added: that His will may be done. But all our prayers ought to lead here: to ask Him that He may know us to be necessary and useful, and that we may meanwhile refer everything to Him in His secret counsel in order that He may do as seems good to Him. But when we have testimony through Holy Scripture that God wills a thing, then it is not proper to offer any reply, as I have already said. Calvin, Sermons on Deity of Christ, Sermon 5, Matt 25:51-66, pp., 88-9.

Commentaries:

1) We must now enter on that question by which vain and inconstant minds are greatly agitated; namely, Why God permitted Adam to be tempted, seeing that the sad result was by no means hidden from him? That He now relaxes Satan’s reins, to allow him to tempt us to sin, we ascribe to judgment and to vengeance, in consequence of man’s alienation from himself; but there was not the same reason for doing so when human nature was yet pure and upright. God, therefore, permitted Satan to tempt man, who was conformed to His own image, and not yet implicated in any crime, having, moreover, on this occasion, allowed Satan the use of an animal which otherwise would never have obeyed him; and what else was this, than to arm an enemy for the destruction of man? This seems to have been the ground on which the Manichaeans maintained the existence of two principles. Therefore, they have imagined that Satan, not being in subjection to God, laid snares for man in opposition to the divine will, and was superior not to man only, but also to God himself. Thus, for the sake of avoiding what they dreaded as an absurdity, they have fallen into execrable prodigies of error; such as, that there are two Gods, and not one sole Creator of the world, and that the first God has been overcome by his antagonist. All, however, who think piously and reverently concerning the power of God, acknowledge that the evil did not take place except by his permission. For, in the first place, it must be conceded, that God was not in ignorance of the event which was about to occur; and then, that he could have prevented it, had he seen fit to do so. But in speaking of permission, I understand that he had appointed whatever he wished to be done. Here, indeed, a difference arises on the part of many, who suppose Adam to have been so left to his own free will, that God would not have him fall. They take for granted, what I allow them, that nothing is less probable than that God should he regarded as the cause of sin, which he has avenged with so many and such severe penalties. When I say, however, that Adam did not fall without the ordination and will of God, I do not so take it as if sin had ever been pleasing to Him, or as if he simply wished that the precept which he had given should be violated. So far as the fall of Adam was the subversion of equity, and of well-constituted order, so far as it was contumacy against the Divine Law-giver, and the transgression of righteousness, certainly it was against the will of God; yet none of these things render it impossible that, for a certain cause, although to us unknown, he might will the fall of man. It offends the ears of some, when it is said God willed this fall; but what else, I pray, is the permission of Him, who has the power of preventing, and in whose hand the whole matter is placed, but his will? I wish that men would rather suffer themselves to be judged by God, than that, with profane temerity, they should pass judgment upon him; but this is the arrogance of the flesh to subject God to its own test. I hold it as a settled axiom, that nothing is more unsuitable to the character of God than for us to say that man was created by Him for the purpose of being placed in a condition of suspense and doubt; wherefore I conclude, that, as it became the Creator, he had before determined with himself what should be man’s future condition. Hence the unskillful rashly infer, that man did not sin by free choice. For he himself perceives, being convicted by the testimony of his own conscience, that he has been too free in sinning. Whether he sinned by necessity, or by contingency, is another question; respecting which see the Institution,and the treatise on Predestination. Calvin, Genesis 3:1-3.

Read the rest of this entry »

1]

5. This Mediator being provided for man, without his desert or expectation, we proceed to consider him as offered to him, and, together with him, life and salvation. The great design of the gospel is to discover or make an overture of Christ and his salvation to man. Without this, the gospel could not be preached, nor a visible publication made of the grace of the covenant which it contains. But as the overture of grace, or the call of God to accept of and embrace Christ as offered in the gospel, is more particularly considered un&r a following Answer, shall reserve the farther consideration of this matter to that place. Thomas Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, 1:454.

2]

The doctrine of particular redemption is supposed then, to be inconsistent with the goodness of God, as it renders salvation impossible to the greater part of mankind, and their state irretrievable by any means which can be used, and so has a tendency to lead them to despair. Now, it must be owned that they for whom Christ Did not die cannot be saved, and that, had God described any persons by name, or given some visible character by. which it might be certainly concluded that they were not redeemed, it would follow that their state would be desperate. But this is not his usual method of dealing with mankind. He might, indeed, have done it ; and then such would, have been thereby excluded from the means of grace, and not encouraged to attend them. But he has, in wisdom and sovereignty; concealed from the world the event of things, with respect to the individuals who were redeemed. There is hence a vast difference between men’s concluding that a part of the world are excluded from redemption, and that they themselves are included in that number. We have no warrant to say the latter concerning either ourselves or any others, especially so long as we are under the means of grace. There is, indeed, one character of persons in the gospel which gives ground to conclude that Christ did not die for them ; and that is what respects those who had committed the unpardonable sin. I shall not, at present, enter into the dispute whether that sin can now be committed or not, since we may have occasion to insist on the subject under another Head. But there seems to be sufficient ground to determine, either that this cannot be certainly known, since the extraordinary gift of discerning of spirits is now ceased; or, at least, that it cannot be applied to any who attend on the means of grace with a desire of receiving spiritual advantage thereby. Again, if Christ’s not dying for the whole world be a means to lead men to despair, as salvation is hereby rendered impossible, this consequence may, with equal evidence, be deduced from the supposition that all mankind shall not be saved, which they who defend universal redemption pretend not to deny. But will any one say, that this supposition leads men to despair? Or ought it to be reckoned a reflection on the divine goodness, that so many are left to perish in their fallen state by the judicial hand of God, which might have applied salvation to all, as well as purchased it for all mankind?

The doctrine of particular redemption is farther supposed to be inconsistent with the preaching of the gospel, which is generally styled a door of hope. The doctrine, it is said, is such that the dispensation that we are under cannot be called a day of grace ; and it renders all the overtures of salvation made to sinners illusory, and contains a reflection, not only on the grace of God, but on his holiness. In order to our replying to this, something must be premised to explain what we mean by a day of grace, and the hope’ of the gospel which accompanies it. Now, by calling the state of things under which we live ‘day of grace,’ we do not mean a dispensation in which all men might repent and believe, and obtain salvation by their own power, without the special influences of the Holy Ghost, for this would be to ascribe that to man which is peculiar to God; nor do we mean that God will give special grace to all who sit under the sound of the gospel, for this is contrary to common observation and experience, since many make a profession of religion who are destitute of saving grace. As for the hope of the gospel, or that door of hope which is opened in it to sinners, we cannot understand any thing else by it, but that all without distinction are commanded and encouraged to wait on God in his instituted means of grace, while the event must be left to him who gives or withholds success to them as he pleases. All have this encouragement, that, peradventure, they may obtain grace, under the means of grace; nor is the encouragement inconsistent with these means being styled a door of hope. God is not obliged to grant sinners a greater degree of hope than this, to encourage them to wait on him in his ordinances; though, indeed, there is a farther motive to induce us, namely, that this is the ordinary way in which ho works grace. Or, if God is pleased to give us desires after the efficacy of his grace, or any degree of conviction of sin and misery, this is still a farther ground of hope, though it falls short of that grace of hope which accompanies salvation.-As to the preaching of the gospel, and its overtures of salvation to all, being, on the supposition of Christ’s not dying for all men, alleged to be illusory, and repugnant to the holiness of God, we do not deny that, in preaching the gospel, Christ is offered to the chief of sinners, or that the proclamation of grace is made public to all, without distinction. This, however, will not overthrow the doctrine of particular redemption, if we rightly consider what is done in offering Christ to sinners. Let it be observed, then, that God has given us no warrant to enter into his secret determinations respecting the event of things, or to give any persons ground to conclude that they are redeemed, and have a warrant to apply to themselves the promise of salvation, or any blessings which accompany it, while in an unconverted state. Ministers are not to address their discourses to a mixed multitude of professing Christians, in. such a way as if they knew that they were all effectually called and chosen of God. Our Saviour compares them to ‘ the faithful and wise steward,’ whose business it is ‘ to give to all their portion of meat in due season.’” They are, therefore, consistently with what is contained in scripture, to tell their hearers that salvation is purchased for a part of mankind, that they know not but they may be of the number, and that therefore they must be importunate with God for that grace which will be an evidence to them that they are so. Again, Christ’s being offered to sinners, in the preaching of the gospel, is his being set forth therein as a most desirable object, altogether lovely, worthy to be embraced and submitted to ; and not only so, but that he will certainly save all whom he effectually calls, inasmuch as he has purchased salvation for them. Further, the preaching of the gospel includes an informing of sinners, that it is their indispensable duty and interest to believe in Christ, and that, as a means to this, they are commanded and encouraged to ‘wait on him for that grace which can enable them to believe. Also as a farther encouragement, the gospel lets them know that there is a certain connection between grace and salvation ; so that none who are enabled by faith to come to Christ, shall be cast out and rejected by him. This is the preaching and the hope of the gospel; and in this sense, the overtures of salvation are made. But this is not in the least inconsistent with the doctrine of particular redemption. Thomas Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, 1:528-529 .

3]

They who express some regard to this call, are generally said to have common, grace, as distinguished from others who are under the powerful and efficacious influence of the Spirit, which is styled special. The former are often under some impressive influences by the common work of the Spirit, under the preaching of the gospel, and, notwithstanding, are in an unconverted state. Their consciences are sometimes awakened, and they bring many charges and accusations against themselves; and from a dread of consequences, they abstain from many enormous crimes, as well as practise several duties of religion. They are also said to be made partakers of’ some great degrees of restraining grace. These results all arise from no other than the Spirit’s common work of conviction; as he is said to ‘reprove the world of sin.’ They are styled, in this Answer, the common operations of the Spirit.’ They may be called operations, inasmuch as they include something more than God’s sending ministers to address themselves to sinners, in a way of persuasion or arguing ; for, the Spirit of God deals with their consciences under the ministry of the word. It is true, this is no more than common grace; yet it may be styled the Spirit’s work. For though the call is no other than common; and though the Spirit is considered as an external agent, inasmuch as he never dwells in the hearts of any but believers; yet the effect produced is internal in the mind and consciences of men, and, in some degree, in she will, which is almost persuaded to comply. These operations are sometimes called “the Spirit’s striving with man.” But as many of these internal motions are said to be resisted and quenched,-when persons first act contrary to the dictates of their consciences, and afterwards wholly extinguish them, the Spirit’s work in those whom lie thus calls, is not effectual or saving. These are not united to Christ by his Spirit or by faith; and the grace which they possess is generally styled common grace.

Here let us consider that there are some things presented to us in an objective way, which contain the subject of the gospel, or that call which is given to sinners to pursue those methods which, by divine appointment, lead to salvation. As ‘faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God; so do common convictions, and whatever carries the appearance of grace in the unregenerate. In this respect God deals with men as intelligent creatures, capable of making some such improvement of those instructions and intimations as may tend, in many respects, to their advantage. This must be supposed, else the preaching of the gospel could not, abstractedly from those saving advantages which some receive by it, be reckoned an universal blessing to those who are favoured with it. This is here called the grace which is offered to those who are outwardly called by the ministry of the word. Offers of grace, and invitations to come to Christ, are words used by almost all who have treated on this subject. Of late, indeed, some have been ready to conclude that these modes of speaking tend to overthrow the doctrine we are maintaining; for they argue that an overture, or invitation, supposes a power in him to whom it is given to comply with it. Did I think this idea necessarily contained in the expressions, I would choose to substitute others in the room of them. However, to remove prejudices or unjust representations which the use of them may occasion, either here or elsewhere, I shall briefly give an account of the reason why I use them, and what I understand by them. If it be said that such expressions are not to be found in scripture, the circumstance of their not being there should make us less tenacious of them. Yet they may be used without just offence given, if explained agreeably to scripture. Let it be considered, then, that the presenting of an object, whatever it be, to the understanding and, is generally called an ‘offering‘ of it. Thus Gad says to David, from the Lord, ‘I offer thee three things; choose thee one of them,” &c. So, if God sets before us life and death, blessing and cursing, and bids us choose which we will have, his doing so is equivalent to hat is generally called an offer of grace. As for invitations to come to Christ, it is plain that there are many scriptures which speak to that purpose. Thus it is wid, ‘In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink.’ And, ‘Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters.’” And elsewhere Christ says, ‘Come unto me, all ye that labour, and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.’ And, ‘Let him that is athirst come; and whosoever mill let him take the water of life freely.’ Moreover, when an offer or invitation to accept of a thing, thus objectively presented to us, is made, the offer of it always supposes that it is valuable, that it would be greatly our interest to accept it, and that it is our indispensable duty to do so. Now, these are the principal ideas which I include in my sense of the word, when I speak of offers of grace in the gospel, or of invitations to come to Christ. Yet understanding the offers in this sense, does not necessarily infer a power in us to accept them, without the assistance of divine grace. Thus it may be said that Christ came into the world to save sinners; that he will certainly apply the redemption which he has purchased, to all for whom the price was given; that a right to salvation is inseparably connected with faith and repentance; that these and all other graces are God’s gifts; that we are to pray, wait, and hope for them, under the ministry of the word; that, if we be, in God’s own time and way, enabled to exercise these graces, our being so will be to our unspeakable advantage; and that, therefore, it cannot but be our duty to attend upon God in all his holy institutions, in hope of saving blessings:–these things may be said, and the gospel may he thus preached, without supposing that grace is in our own power. Now this is what we principally intend by gospel overtures or invitations. At the same time, we cannot approve of some expressions subversive of the doctrine of special redemption, how moving and pathetic soever they may appear to be; as when any one, to induce sinners to come to Christ, says, “God is willing; and Christ is willing, and has done his part; and the Spirit is ready to do his; and shall we be unwilling, and thereby destroy ourselves? Christ has purchased salvation for us; the Spirit offers his assistance to us; and shall we refuse these overtures? Christ invites us ‘to come to him, and leaves it to our free will, whether we will comply with or reject these invitations. He is, as it were, undetermined whether he shall save us or not, and leaves the matter to our own conduct. We ought, therefore, to be persuaded ‘to comply with the invitation.” This method of explaining offers of grace, and invitations to come to Christ, is not what we intend when we make use of these expressions. 2. We are now to consider the persons to whom this common call is given. It is indefinite, not directed to the elect only, or those with respect to whom God designs to make it effectual to their salvation ; for, according to the commission which our Saviour gave to his apostles, the gospel was to be preached to all nations, or to every creature in those places to which it was sent. The reason is obvious; the counsel of God concerning election is secret, and not to be considered as the rule of human conduct; nor are they whom God is pleased to employ in preaching the gospel, supposed to know whether he will give success to their endeavours, by enabling those who are called to comply with it. Thomas Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism, 2:49-51.

A short bio-entry from Richard Muller on Ridgeley:

Thomas Ridgley (ca. 1667-1734); studied for the ministry in Wiltshire at Trowbridge with John Davidson. In 1695 he was called as assistant to Thomas Gouge in the independent church at Three Cranes, Thames Street, London. When Gouge died in 1700, Ridgley succeeded him as pastor of the congregation, a post he held until his death. In 1712, Ridgley was appointed tutor in divinity at the Fund Academy, Tenter Alley, Moorfields. He was viewed as a defender of orthodoxy against Arianism and Arminianism. He was granted the D.D. by the University of Aberdeen for his A sody of Divinity (1731). Richard Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, 51. [old edition]