His name is sometimes spelt: Parreus, or Pareus.

One modern secondary source

1) Christ carried, dissolved, expiated the sins of all, if we consider the magnitude of the price or sufficiency of the ransom, but only the faithful and not of all, if we consider the efficacy, fruit and application of the ransom. Irenicum,” Source: G. Michael Thomas, The Extent of the Atonement, (Cumbria, UK: Paternoster: 1997), 116.

Two early secondary sources:

2) “And thus Pareus himself in his Irenicon saith, “That the sins of all men lay on Christ; and so he died for all, that is, for all mens sins as the cause of his death: And you may tell any wicked man, Thy sins killed Christ (what-ever the deniers say to excuse them).” Richard Baxter, Catholick Theologie (London, 1675), I.ii.53.

3) “The cause and matter of the passion of Christ was the sense and sustaining of the anger of God excited against the sin, not of some men, but of the whole human race; whence it arises, that the whole of reconciliation was not obtained or restored to all.  [Act. Synod. Dortrect. p. 217.]”

David Paraeus, “Letter to the Synod of Dort, on the Second Article of the Remonstrants,” cited by John Davenant, A Dissertation on the Death of Christ, 1832, 2:356.

Primary sources:

4) “Thou wast slain”] that is, by dying for the sins of the world, that declares thyself to be the Messiah, whom Isaiah forward should be led “as a sheep to the slaughter,” to take away the sins of the world. Here we are taught that the mediator ought both to be slain for us, that is, to merit: and also to take the book, that is meritoriously to bestow life an righteousness upon others. Seeing therefore he only merited by his sacrifice, it must necessarily follow, that none else could take the book, that is, reveal the counsel of God to the Church, and by his power give salvation.

“And thou has redeemed us to God by thy blood”] Now the Church triumphant praises the Lamb, and applies the price of her redemption with the effects thereof unto herself. Thus we ought so acknowledge the benefits of Christ, as to make them our own, not only in believing that he has redeemed others by his blood, “and made them kings and priests to God,” but ourselves also: for true justifying faith is accompanied with a certain persuasion of our own salvation: “I live,” says the Apostle, “by the faith of the son of God who loved me, and gave himself for me.”

Hence we observe two things: “First” that the death of Christ is truly a ransom satisfactory for our sins: and that our redemption by it, is not metaphorical (as the new “Samosatenians” blasphemously affirm) but proper: for the redemption which is made by a price is proper. But such is ours by Christ, because by the shedding of his blood, he has paid a full ransom, and satisfied the justice of God, as the Scripture witnesses Matt. 20:28. and 1 Tim. 2:6. being the same with what is here said, “that has redeemed us by thy blood:” and Chap. 1:5. “who has washed us in his blood,” and Heb. 1:3. “purged our sins by himself:” unless that by the word “redemption” is properly signified the whole work of our salvation: by “washing” and “purging” a part thereof, viz. our justification or sanctification. This place therefore and so many others, proving Christ’s satisfactory ransom, are to be apposed against “Socinian blasphemies.”

“Secondly,” that the redemption by Christ’s blood, is truly universal, as sufficient, and propounded not only to one nation, or a few, but to all nations, tongues and peoples: yet not so, as if all promiscuously should be saved: but those of every tribe, people and language, who believe in Christ. And this much the Elders teach us: “Thou have redeemed us of every tribe.”

…“And behold, and round about the throne”] The third apparition is of angels who sing “the new song” together with the beasts and Elders: for howsoever the Angels are not Redeemed by the blood of Christ, as men: yet in Christ they are gathered together into one, being subject unto him as the head of the Church, whereof they are members: and therefore they also praise the Lamb, as their Lord, and bless him in regard to the redemption of man-kind. David Pareus, A Commentary Upon the Divine Revelation of the Apostle and Evangelist, John (Amsterdam: Printed by C.P. Anno, 1644), 103 and 104.

5) The same benefit of redemption the Elders celebrate, Chap.5:9. “Thou has redeemed us to our God by thy blood.” And indeed this benefit we enjoy in this life: for now, as many as through faith, are “sealed” in the blood of the lamb, are redeemed; howbeit the fulness of our redemption is reserved to the life to come.

But are not all redeemed by Christ, died he not for all? Says not the Apostle Peter that he bought these “false prophets,” by whom he is denied? To this Augustine well answers, that all are said to be redeemed, according to the dignity of the price: which would suffice for the redemption of all men, if all by faith did receive the benefit offered. But as many as pass the time of their being in this life in infidelity, they remain unredeemed through their own fault. The sealed therefore are only redeemed, because they alone by faith receive the grace of redemption, through the grace of election, which God vouchsafed them (not to the others) from all eternity. David Pareus, A Commentary Upon the Divine Revelation of the Apostle and Evangelist, John (Amsterdam: Printed by C.P. Anno, 1644), 333-334.

6) [Paraeus, contribution to Ursinus’ Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism]

Q 40: Why was it necessary for Christ to suffer “death”? A40: Because the justice and truth of God required that satisfaction for our sins could be made in no other way than by the death of the Son of God.

III Did Christ die for all?

In answering this question we must make a distinction, so as to harmonize those passages of Scriptures which seem, to teach contradictory doctrines. In some places Christ is said to have died for all, and for the whole world. “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” “That he, by-the-grace of God, should taste death for every man.” “We thus judge that if one died for all, then were all dead; and that he died for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him that died for them, and rose again.” “Who gave himself a ransom for all,” &c. (John 2:2. Heb. 2:9. 2 Cor. 5:15. 1 Tim. 2:6.) The Scriptures, on the contrary, affirm in many places, that Christ died, prayed, offered himself, &c., only for many, for the elect, for his own people, for the Church, for his sheep, &c.” I pray for them; I pray not for the world; but for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine,” that is, the elect alone.” The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” “I am not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” He shall save his people from their sins.” “This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” “Christ was once offered, to bear the sins of many.” “By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities.” “Christ loved the Church, and gave himself for it.” (John 17:9. Matt. 20:28; 15:24; 1:21. Heb. 9:28; Is. 53:1; Ep. 5:25.)

What shall we say in view of these seemingly opposite passages of Scripture? Does the word of God contradict itself? By no means. But this will be the case, bless these declarations, which in some places seem to teach that Christ died for all, and in others that he died for a part only, can be reconciled by a proper and satisfactory distinction, which distinction, or reconciliation, is two-fold.

There are some who interpret these general declarations of the whole number of the faithful, or of all that believe; because the promises of the gospel properly belong to all those that believe, and because the Scriptures do often restrict them to such as believe: “Whosoever believeth in him shall not perish.” The righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all them that believe.” That through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” It is in this way that Ambrose interprets those passages which speak of the death of Christ as extending to all: The people of God,” says he, “have their fullness, and although a large portion of men either neglect, or reject, the grace of the Saviour, yet there is a certain SPECIAL UNIVERSALITY of the elect, and fore-known, separated and discerned from the generality of all, that a whole world might seem to be saved out of a whole world; and all men might seem to be redeemed out of all men,” &c. In this way there is no repugnancy, or contradiction; for all those that believe are the many, the peculiar people, the Church, the sheep, the elect, &c., for whom Christ died, and gave himself.

Others reconcile these seemingly contradictory passages of Scripture by making a distinction between the sufficiency, and efficacy of the death of Christ. For there are certain contentious persons, who deny that these declarations which speak in a general way, are to be restricted to the faithful alone, that is, they deny that the letter itself, or the simple language of Scripture does thus limit them, and in proof thereof they bring forward those passages in which salvation seems to be attributed, not only to those that believe, but also to hypocrites and apostates, as it is said : “Denying the Lord which bought them.” And, also, when it is said that they “have forgotten that they were purged from their old sins.” (2 Pet. 2:1; 1:9.) But it is manifest that declarations of this kind are to be understood either concerning the mere external appearance, and vain glorying of redemption, or of sanctification; or else of the sufficiency, and greatness of the merit of Christ. That it may not, therefore, be necessary for us to contend much with these captious and fastidious persons concerning the restriction of those passages which speak so generally (although it is most manifest in itself) and that those places which speak of the redemption of hypocrites may the more easily be reconciled, some prefer (and not without reason according to my judgment) to interpret those declarations, which in appearance seem to be contradictory, partly of the sufficiency, and partly of the application and efficacy of the death of Christ.

They affirm, therefore, that Christ died for all, and that he did not die for all; but in different respects. He died for all, as touching the sufficiency of the ransom which he paid; and not for all; but only for the elect, or those that believe, as touching the application and efficacy thereof. The reason of the former lies in this, that the atonement of Christ is sufficient for expiating all the sins of all men, or of the whole world, if only all men will make application thereof unto themselves by faith. For it cannot be said to be insufficient, unless we give countenance to that horrible blasphemy (which God forbid!) that some blame of the destruction of the ungodly results from a defect in the merit of the mediator. The reason of the latter is, because all the elect, or such as believe, and they alone, do apply unto themselves by faith the merit of Christ’s death, together with the efficacy thereof, by which they obtain righteousness, and life according as it is said, “He that believeth on the Son of God, hath everlasting life.” (John 3:36.) The rest are excluded from this efficacy of Christ’s death by their own unbelief, as it is again said, “He that believeth not shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (John 3:36.) Those, therefore, whom the Scriptures exclude from the efficacy of Christ’s death, cannot be said to be included in the number of those for whom he died as it respects the sufficiency of his death, but only as to its sufficiency; because the death of Christ is also sufficient for their salvation, if they will but believe; and the only reason of their exclusion arises from their unbelief.

It is in the same may, that is, by making the same distinction that we reply to those who ask concerning the purpose of Christ, Did he will to die for all? For just as he died, so also he willed to die. Therefore, as he died for all, in respect to the sufficiency of his ransom; and for the faithful alone in respect to the efficacy of the same, so also he willed to die for all in general, as touching the sufficiency of his merit, that is, he willed to merit by his death, grace, righteousness, and life in the most abundant manner for all; because would not that any thing should be wanting as far as he and his merits are concerned, so that all the wicked who perish may be without excuse. But he willed to die for the elect alone as touching the efficacy of his death, that is, he would not only sufficiently merit grace and life for them alone, but also effectually confers these upon them, grants faith, and the holy Spirit, and brings it to pass that they apply to themselves, by faith, the benefits of his death, and so obtain for themselves the efficacy of his merits.

In this sense it is correctly said that Christ died in a different manner for believers and unbelievers. Neither is this declaration attended with any difficulty or inconvenience, inasmuch as it harmonizes not only with scripture, but also with experience; for both testify that the remedy of sin and death is most sufficiently and abundantly offered in the gospel to all; but that it is effectually applied, and profitable only to them that believe. The Scriptures, also, everywhere, restrict the efficacy of redemption to certain persons only, as to Christ’s sheep, to the elect and as such as believe, whilst on the other hand it clearly excludes from the grace of Christ the reprobate and unbelieving as long as they remain in their unbelief. “What concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?” (2 Cor. 6:15. See, also, Matt. 20:28; 26:28. Is. 53:11. John 10:15. Matt. 15:24.)

Christ moreover, prayed only for the elect, including those who were already his disciples, and also such as would afterwards believe on his name. Hence he says, “I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me.” (John 17:9.) If, therefore, Christ would not pray for the world, by which we are to understand such as do not believe, much less would he die for them, as far as the efficacy of his death is concerned; for it is less to pray, than to die for any one. There are also two inseparable parts of the sacrifice of Christ-intercession and death. And if he himself refuse to extend one part to the ungodly, who is he that will dare to give the other to them.

Lastly, the orthodox Fathers and Schoolmen, also distinguish and restrict the above passages of Scripture as we have done; especially Augustine, Cyril and Prosper. Lombard writes as follows: “Christ offered himself to God, the Trinity for all men, as it respects the sufficiency of the price; but only for the elect as it regards the efficacy thereof, because he effected, and purchased salvation only for those who were predestinated.” Thomas writes: “The merit of Christ, as to its sufficiency, extends equally to all, but not as to its efficacy, which happens partly on account of free will, and partly on account of the election of God, through which the effects of the merits of Christ are mercifully bestowed upon some, and withheld from others according to the just judgment of God.” Other Schoolmen, also, speak in the same manner, from which it is evident that Christ died for all in such a may, that the benefits of his death, nevertheless, pertain properly to such as believe, to whom alone they are also profitable and available.

Obj. 1. The promises of the gospel are universal, as appears from such declarations as invite all men to come to Christ, that they may have life. Hence it does not merely extend to such as believe. Ans. The promise is indeed universal in respect to such as repent and believe; but to extend it to the reprobate, would be blasphemy. “There is,” saith Ambrose, as just quoted, “a certain special universality of the elect, and foreknown, discerned and distinguished ‘from the entire generality.” This restriction of the promises to such as believe, is proven from the plain and explicit form in which they are expressed.” That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” “The righteousness of God, which is by the faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all them that believe.” “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden.” “Whosever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” “He became the author of eternal salvation unto all that obey him.” And from the words of Christ: give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye pearls before swine,” &c. (John 3:16. Rom. 3:22. Matt. 11:28. Acts 2:21. Heb. 5:9. Matt. 7:6.)

Obj. 2., Christ died for all. Therefore his death does not merely extend to such as believe. Ans. Christ died for all as it regards the merit and sufficiency* of the ransom which he paid; but only for those that believe as it respects the application and efficacy of his death; for seeing that the death of Christ is applied to such alone, and is profitable to them, it is correctly said to belong–properly to them alone, as has been already shown. [pp., 221-225] [* the modern Willard translation, has “efficacy” which appears to be incorrect. An earlier English translation has “sufficiency.” Sufficiency fits with previous statements and the sentiment.]


A Preface of an Oration Pronounced on Easter Even by a Certain Student of Divinity in the Famous University of Heidelberg Touching that Question.

To whom the benefits of the Death and Resurrection of Christ appertain: and how Christ died for all men.

You may refer this
discourse to the fifte
question on that Article
of the Creed He died.

Concerning the story & benefit of our Lord’s Resurrection I supposed to have hitherto sufficiently treated: It follows that I proceed unto the last point proposed, I mean, to whom this benefit appertains. Wherefore directing our course as it were by the lode-star of Scripture we pronounce by virtue and authority therefore that so precious & inestimable [?] benefit belongs unto all the faithful, and to them alone; and we exclude the wicked & unbelievers, as long as they remain such, from having any interest therein. For all the faithful, & they alone have a taste of the sweetness of those fruits (suppose, free justification before God, a quickening from the death of sin and the body, & lastly immortal life and glory) these heavenly blessings I say, all the faithful and they alone partake and enjoy; because they all, & they alone apply them unto themselves through faith.

The fruits of Christ’s
Resurrection belong
to all the faithful &
to them alone.

For these are they who hear Christ’s words, who believe, & have eternal life, and come not unto condemnation. These are they who are justified by faith, are reconciled unto God, and have peace with him through our Lord Jesus Christ (Joh. 3:36, & 5:24. Rom. 5:1; 1 Pet. 1:13; Act. 15:9; 1 Thess. 4:14′ 1 Cor. 10:5). These are they who being regenerate by the Holy Ghost are raised with Christ unto newness of life, whose hearts are purified by faith. Finally these are they which sleep in Jesus whom one day “God will bring with him” having raised them from the dead, that they may enjoy for ever the glory of his heavenly kingdom. Now the wicked being utterly void and destitute of faith which justifies, how should they, I pray you, partake in any of these blessings, “with whom God is not pleased,” (for Heb. 11:6, without faith it is impossible to please God) who belong not unto Christ, neither are they heirs of the kingdom, who neither have title nor right In Christ Jesus, nor To Christ Jesus (as the lawyers use to speak) how should Christ appertain unto them? How should the benefits be extended unto them? Nay rather all these are by the mouth of the Son of God, himself far removed & debarred these treasures, and are adjudged unto eternal malediction & everlasting death. For thus says he in the Gospel; “He that believes not, is condemned already, & the wrath of God abides on him.” And Paul, testifies “if any man has not the spirit of Christ, the same is not his”; which place of the apostle I suppose to be very pertinent to this present purpose. For “if the unfaithful belong not unto Christ, neither are they of Christ”; it may soundly be argued, & well concluded by the logicians rule of Relatives that Christ with his benefits pertains not unto them: and as they are not Christ’s: so neither is Christ theirs. For how, I pray, should Christ pertain unto them whom one day at the last judgement he shall pronounce before all the world aliens and strangers from him, his benefits, and his kingdom: of which eh shall testify that he never knew them: lastly, whom he shall cast, as being the cursed workers of iniquity into hell fire.

Christ died for all men.

Yea but, say you, “Christ died for the sins of all. Therefore he rose again for the justification of all.” The answer hereunto is twofold, either of which is true and sound. First, as often as the Gospel extends the fruit of Christ’s merits and benefits unto all, it must be understood (as says Saint Ambrose) of “the whole number of the faithful and elect.” For this is the usual and common voice found everywhere throughout the whole course of the gospel. “He which believes shall be saved” and “comes not into judgment. He which believes not, shall be damned and is judged already,” and “the wrath of God abides on him.” Wherefore the Gospel dispossesses [all unto?] believers of Christ’s benefits, not only by a flat exclusion, but also by positive virtue of that condition of faith and repentance, by which he promises expressly or covertly his benefits unto men, & which it appears is never found in the reprobate, that is, such as do persist, and will still persist in their impiety. Christ therefore is said to be dead for all: that is, for all the faithful and elect; for whom alone he also prayed, and in whom alone he find the end and fruit of his death. But to extend the benefits of Christ’s death unto infidels, & reprobates, for whom he never prayed, whom he never knew, or took for his own, and on whom the wrath of God abides for ever; what else is this but against his express commandment to give holy things, and cast pearls before swine. This answer may be strongly maintain by the authority of Holy Scripture, and testimonies of sound fathers and is much available unto Christian consolation. Howbeit there is another answer no less true, wherewith we may satisfy the most contentious wranglers: that Christ died for all men absolutely and without exception to wit, if you respect the sufficiency of the merit, and the price he paid. It is out of all doubt and controversy that the death of the Son of God is of such weight & and worth that it may serve to purge and cleanse the sins not of one world only, but thousands of world: if at least all men would apprehend by faith this salve of sin. But the question concerns the efficacy and participation itself of the fruits which we mainly deny to be common to the believing, and the unbelieving, or t be generally promised or given [word unreadable?] Gospel; and we hold it no sound doctrine to say that in this respect Christ died alike for all both elect and reprobate.

But here some men possess with an evil [folly?] as if the Church had not other controversies enough, spew out on us their stinking poison with open mouth, taking it grievously, that we divide not those heavenly treasures and jewels equally to the godly, and ungodly; to the faithful, and unfaithful; to the elect, and reprobate; to Christ’s members, and the Devil’s vassals; to the sheep, &the swine. To make loud out-cries on us for denying that Christ died for all. They say our assertion is tainted with a more odious blasphemy than any of the Saracens, Turks, and Pagans; and that by it Christian religion is clean overthrown.

It is not my purpose to encounter with these monsters of men, only I must needs touch the slander they fasten on us. For what slander is there, if this be none. When we distinguish the worth of the merit, from the efficacy and participating of the benefits, and restrain according to Scripture and the judgement of the soundest Fathers this participation to the whole number of the faithful alone gathered from amongst the Jews & Gentiles; to we then deny that Christ died for all?

Why we must distinguish
between sufficiency and
the efficacy of Christ’s

But that the truth of this controversy may the more appear, and these busy heads, if it be possible, may be by some satisfaction on our part be set at rest, [unreadable word] be brief let down the force of our main reasons whereon we ground this our distinction.

And first the Holy Scripture itself teaches us plainly this kind of distinction, and forces us thereunto For you shall find in Scripture sometimes absolutely spoken that Christ “tasted death for all men”; “that he gave himself a ransom for all men,” (Heb. 2:9; 1 Tim. 2:6), “that he is the reconciliation for the sins of the whole world” (1 Joh. 2:2). Again you shall read that Christ “prayed, not nor satisfied himself,” that is offered up himself for the world, but “for the elect which were given him”: “that he laid down his life for his sheep” (Joh. 17:9, 10:15). That “he gave his life to for the ransom of many”: that “he shed his blood for many” (Mat. 26:28; Rom. 8:9): that “the world cannot receive the Holy Spirit, because it sees him, neither knows him”: and “because it has not the purity [?], therefore it is not CHRIST’S. These places carry some show of contrariety, were it not that the former are understood by us of the sufficiency of satisfaction, and the latter of the efficacy and working virtue thereof.

Furthermore other places occur which seem to impart unto the wicked the benefit of redemption; as when Peter says that they “deny the Lord which has bought them,” that they were “purged from their old sins” (2 Pet. 2:1, 1:9), and Paul also says that they are “sanctified with the blood of the Testament” (Heb. 10:29): all which the Scripture elsewhere enforces us to interpret either of the vain glorying of Hypocrites of their redemption and sanctification: or else to understand them no otherwise then of the extent and sufficiency of Christ’s satisfaction: whereas it simply excludes the unfaithful and unrepentant from the benefit of Redemption, and constantly avers that they be yet “held captives in the snares of the Devil” (2 Tim. 2:26), that they be overswayed by him and carried headlong to work [?] wickedness; that the “wrath of God abides on them” ( he says, “it abides, not it returns,” as if it had at any time relinquished them) lastly that Christ “never knew them” much less redeemed them.

The authority of the Fathers
and Schoolmen.

Now if I were purposed to produce the opinion of Fathers, and the sounder Schoolmen, who thus interpret Scripture with us, I should lead you into a large discourse. Notwithstanding it is not unfitting my purpose to cite at the least some few of them for confirmation.

Let us here Cyril thus reconciling those words of Christ, “I pray not for the world” with that saying of John. “He is a propitiation for the sins of the whole world.” John” (says he) seems to dissent from our Saviour. For our Saviour here refuses to pray for the world; but John affirms that he is the propitiation and reconciliation for not our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world: But the blessed Evangelist S. John because he was a Jew, least the Lord should seem to be an advocate with his Father for the Jews only, & not for other nations, which as soon as they were called, obeyed, of necessity, added “for the whole world.” But the Lord Jesus separating you from them which are not his, says, “I pray not for them alone who keep my sayings and taken my yoke.” For whose mediator and high Priest he is, he does for good cause impart unto them along the benefit of his mediation. (Cyril. in Joh. ii.II. cap. 19).

Hitherto Cyril.

Look August. Tom. 7.

Let us hear Prosper also I this answer to Vincentius, “As far forth” (says he in his answer to the first objection) as you respect the greatness and power of the price, “Or as you respect the [unreadable word?] whole cause of mankind, so the blood of Christ is the redemption of the whole world: but they pass the time of their life here without faith and without the Sacrament of regeneration,” they have no part in his redemption. “Whereas then in regard of the one whole cause of mankind truly by our Lord Jesus all are well said to be redeemed, & yet all are not freed from captivity; without doubt” the appropriation of Redemption is there is out of whom the prince of this world is cast & dislodged: “and are now no longer limbs of the devil, but members of Christ: whose death was not so communicated unto all mankind, that it should effect the Redemption of these” who were not to be regenerated and renewed in the spirit: “But so, as that, that which was by one example performed in behalf of all, might by the Sacrament be confirmed in some particulars. For the potion of immortality being a confect of our infirmity and God’s truth, is of force [?] in itself to profit all, but if it be not drunk it heals not.”

The same Prosper making answer to the demands of the Frenchmen in plain terms allows of this [word unreadable?],

“Christ died for the faithful alone,” which these men condemn as smelling of Turcism: his words are these: “Whereas then our saviour is rightly said. To have been crucified for the redemption of the whole world in regard to the true and real taking unto man’s nature, and in regard to the common loss we sustained in the person of the first Adam: yet he may well be said to be crucified only for those to whom his death was available. For the “evangelist says that Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but that he should also gather together in one the children of God which were scattered,” (Cap 9. Joh. 11:51, 52).

Thus far Prosper.

Gregory says: “The author of life gave himself over unto death for the life of the elect” (On Ezech. lib. 1.hom. cap 2). Innocentius. 3. who lived about the 1200 year of our Lord thus writes:

The blood of Christ was shed FOR THE PREDESINATE ALONE as touching the efficacy thereof. For the shedding of the righteous blood for the unrighteous was of such a price, that if the whole world would believe in their Redeemer, snares of the Devil should take hold of none (Inn. Ii.2.ca.21. Myst.mys.).

Bernard says; ‘Christ according to the fullness of time indeed died for the wicked, but according to God’s decree of Predestination for his brethren and friends” ( Serm. 10.de 9.vers. in Psal. 91).

Thomas on the 5. Of the Apoc. writes on this manner. “Of the redemption purchased by the passion of Christ we may speak in a double sense & signification, either respecting the sufficiency thereof; & so his passion redeemed all because as concerning himself he delivered all.” For his passion is sufficient to serve & redeem all, yea if there were a thousand worlds as says Anselm in his 2. book [?] 14. Chapter Cur Deus Homo &c: or else we speak thereof respecting the efficacy, & in this sense he redeemed not all by his passion, because all cleave not fast unto the Redeemer, and therefore feel not nor perceive the virtue of redemption.

The same author again says:

the merit of Christ as concerning the sufficiency thereof equally belongs unto all, but concerning the efficacy which happens partly by reason of free-will, & partly by reason of God’s election, by whom the effects and fruits of Christ’s merit are mercifully bestowed on some; and the just judgment of God are withheld from other some (Sum. de verit. mate.26 Quest.7.).

Lombard in his third book Distinct. 22.ca.

“Christ suffered himself up to God the Trinity for all men as touching the sufficiency of the price paid: but for the elect alone as touching the efficacy; because he wrought salvation only for the Predestinate.

What should I say for, where as these present proofs declare sufficiently that this interpretation of Holy Scripture [is?] not upstart or profane, but of ancient received of the Church, and grounded on evident truth. One [?] only place of Peter Galatine a Monk indeed not yet learned in Divine and skillful Hebrew I intend to allege, that these clamorous enemies and novices in divinity may better see how that whatsoever is either unknown unto them, stands not with their monstrous inventions not presently new-fangled & heathenish. This therefore he well & truly comments on these words of Esaiah,

“My righteous servant shall justify many” &c (Isai. 53:11). “Although the passion of Christ ought to be sufficient to wash away the sins of all men, yet it washes not them all away, but their sins only should believe in him, & repent.” For this cause he says, “And himself bare the sins of many” (De Arcanis Catholice verit. li.8.cap.14).

Now omitting authorities let us bring forth the reasons which this upstart Pelagian progeny by their profane & absurd opinion does especially suppose against us.

They labour tooth and nail to prove that “Christ died for all,” why no man denies it. For this is the voice of Scripture.

The ubiquitary Pelagian opinion
touching he restoring of all into
favor and grace with God by the
death of Christ, be they reprobate
or dogs, and swine.

They add hereunto that he died for all, and every particular man. We deny not simply this their assertion, although we find not where the Scripture speaks on this manner. They urge “that he died for all and every particular, both elect and reprobate, for Cain & David, for Judas and Peter, for them which shall be damned in like sort as for them which shall be saved, without all respect either of their faith or infidelity.” This is a hard saying. They run on still, and say “he died for all and every of these not only in respect of the sufficiency of his sacrifice and satisfaction, but also in regard of the efficacy of the same.” What means this new devilism[?]. I pray? That forsooth Christ by his death and blood shedding has truly and effectually delivered from death, purged from sin, sanctified, reconciled unto God and restored unto his grace and favour by his death & blood shedding all and ever single man, yea even them who are not saved, but have been ever since, Cain &are at this day, and shall be hereafter damned. This is their abominable sottish opinion which they build another as false and foolish, that forsooth “all the wicked as many as heretofore perish, or to this day perish, or hereafter shall perish, they neither perished, ne perish, nor shall perish, for their sins, (whereas they are washed away by the blood of Christ Jesus bu for unbelief alone.” They who are not utterly ignorant of this controversy and question will easily grant that we here coin nothing of our own nor speak anything with the intent to slander & reproach them: but oh how horrible a sound is the in Christian ears.

But I believe.
Therefore he prayed and died for me.

Now they are cold comforters who teach afflicted consciences to reason in this manner:

Christ died for all men.
But I am a man.
Therefore Christ died for me.

Against the slander
of pure particulates.

For why, may not a Turk, dog and hog walling in the mire conclude on this manner. O notable comforters, and proclaimers of the grace of God. The strength and very sinews of Christian comfort ins not to be in a man, but to be engrafted in Christ by faith.

Farther they object out of the Apostle, that “All men are quickened and made alive in Christ, even as all die in Adam” (1 Cor. 15:22). Where they absolutely define that all are quickened in Christ, the Scripture & experience shall refute and put them to silence. This is it then which the Apostle says, that Christ bestows grace on all that are his: as Adam communicated and shared with all that are his. And the one indeed, meaning Christ, through the grace which is a work of more moment; the other, meaning Adam, by natural propagation which is a thing more easy. And that this is the scope & sense of S. Paul the words which follow next that all are quickened in Christ, he forthwith adds: “but every man in his own order: The first fruits in Christ; they that are of Christ,” that is to say, they which believe, who also were given him by his Father, and for whom he earnestly prayed unto his Father. And S. Augustine interprets this place not altogether unlike unto us, whereas he says, “that it was therefore said that all are quickened in Christ: but because as no man in the natural body dies but in Adam, so now man is quickened in the spiritual body, but in Christ.

Neither is there any more place left for their cavil, that “by this means Adam is made stronger than Christ, if he draw headlong with himself into destruction and the pit and gulf of death more than Christ saves and frees from the very mouth of hell.” For[?] the power of each party is not to be measured &[?] esteemed according to the number of them which die and are quickened; but rather according to the power whereby destruction & quickening is purchased or effected, and also by the greatness of the benefits either lost or regained. To hurt is a matter of ease, but to heal a work of much main and [_avell?] as says the proverb. You may sooner and with much more ease destroy whole hundreds, then preserve & save one; you may in shorted time cast a number from a bridge into the stream then deliver one only from the peril and danger of drowning: In like manner it was a, a work of more ease to destroy all mankind: then to restore one man out of that general ruin and destruction. That the Devil was able to do, and Adam also was able to do it; this none but Christ could perform. Wild beasts, and calamities have power to hurt, and murder man: but it is in the power of no creature to repair man’s loss of salvation and life eternal; but this was reserved to the power of GOD alone, creator of all things therefore the death of Christ had been of a greater force then the sin of Adam, yea though it had restored but one only man unto life. And certain it is and an undoubted truth, that the blessings recovered by Christ, so far surpasses those whose loss we sustained by Adam, as heavenly things, and things eternal excel earthly and corruptible things. For Adam as the Apostle witnesses is of the earth, earthly: but Christ is heavenly: Adam is a living soul, but Christ is spiritual: Adam cast us out of an earthly paradise, but Christ has placed us in an heavenly Paradise and has given us everlasting happiness.

Thus far I have thought it meet and convenient to proceed in setting down the fruits of Christ’s death and resurrection, which all appertain to them all, and them alone who stick fast unto Christ by faith; & in making answr to the cavils and slander of heretics, &c.

[David Paraeus] Certain learned and excellent discourses: treating and discussing divers hard and difficult points of Christian Religion: Collected, and published in latin, by D. David Parreus, out of the writings of that late famous and worthy light of God’s church, D. Zachary Ursine. Faithfully translated (At London: Imprinted by H.L. and are to be sold by John Royston, at his shop at the great North Dore of Paul’s, at the signe of the Bible, 1613), 135-152.

8) Article 5. That Christ satisfied only for the elect. This is an argument about words or a false accusation. Christ carried, paid, and expiated the sins of all people: if we consider the magnitude of the price or the sufficiency of the ransom: Not the sins of all people, but only of those who have faith: if we consider the efficacy, fruit, and application of the ransom. For so the Scripture: Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). And also: If you do not believe, you will die in your sins (John 8:24). So Ambrose: If you do not believe, Christ did not suffer for you. So Pope Innocent: The blood of Christ was poured out for only the predestined as far as concerns the efficacy, but was poured out for all men as far as concerns the sufficiency. So Lyra: He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, as far as concerns the sufficiency, but for the elect so much as regards the efficacy. There is no disagreement adjoining this understanding. If a Papist or Lutheran thinks otherwise, they consent in error against Scripture and all antiquity. David Pareus, Irenicum sive de Unione et Synodo Evangelicorum concilianda Liber Votivus, Paci Ecclesiae et desiderijs pacificorum dicatus (Heidelberg: Johannes Lancellot, 1615), 142.[Working translation: Michael Lynch]

[Latin: Articulus V. Quod Christus pro solis electis satisfecerit: λογομαχία est, vel falsa accusatio. Omnium peccata Christis portavit, dissolvit, expiavit: si magnitudinem pretii seu λύτρου sufficientiam spectemus: Non omnium, sed tantum fidelium: si λύτρου efficaciam, fructum, applicationem consideremus. Sic enim scriptura: (1 John 1.29. Joh. 8.24.) Ecce, agnus Dei, qui tollit peccata mundi. Et tamen: Si non credideritis, moriemini in peccatis vestris. Sic Ambrosius (Ambr. De Fide ad Grat. ls. 4 cap. 1.): Si non credis, Christus tibi non passus est. Sic Innocentius Papa: (Innocet. lib. 2. ca. 4. de Myst Miss.) Pro solis praedestinatis effusus est Christi sanguis, quantum ad efficientiam: sed pro omnibus hominibus effusus est, quantum ad sufficientiam. Sic Lyra: (Lyra in 1 John 2.) Est Propitiatio pro peccatis totius mundi, quantam ad sufficientiam: sed pro electis tantam, quantum ad efficaciam. Juxta hunc intellectum nulla est dissensio. Si aliter Papista et Lutherani sentiunt, contra scripturam et totam vetustatem in errore consentiunt. David Pareus, Irenicum sive de Unione et Synodo Evangelicorum concilianda Liber Votivus, Paci Ecclesiae et desiderijs pacificorum dicatus (Heidelberg: Johannes Lancellot, 1615), 142.]

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 29th, 2007 at 11:04 am and is filed under For Whom did Christ Die?. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 comments so far


Hey Paul

If you are volunteering, I will be grateful.

I am the typo-king from way back. While I try to work through my material and self-correct, I dont always catch everything. And some of this is from scans. If you find something I am more than willing to correct it.

As to confidence, well… I am not that worried. Look past my imperfections and to the primary source author.

Seriously, if you spot anything, and are willing to inform me, let me know and I will change it.

Thanks too for dropping by.


August 29th, 2007 at 1:52 am

I’ve updated the Paraeus file by adding a secondary source quotation from Davenant. Credit to SteveW for the heads-up.

January 30th, 2008 at 12:28 pm

One Trackback/Ping

  1. Theology Online: Theology, Back to the Basics » Archive » Dabney on objections to limited redemption (continued)    Sep 24 2007 / 9pm:

    […] Dabney was probably not aware of the classic Calvinian position (see for example, Paraeus, Kimedoncius, and Vermigli  he seems to have adopted  these  lines of interpretation […]

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)