Rennecher:

To Predestinate therefore is, to purpose and determine something with ones self, that it should have a being, before such time that it be, or do anything: and withal, it is the setting apart, and ordaining of that thing unto some certain end. This belongs not peculiarly only to God himself, but also ought to have relation to every wise and prudent man, which before he take in hand to bring to pass any thing, is wont seriously and advisedly to have some consultation, concerning the end for which he will bring that thing to pass. But when this is attributed unto God, it is also very large, and is extended generally unto all creatures, which God from everlasting by his certain decree has ordained and disposed to this or that use and end before they were created. But here, when we speak of mankind, and their end, this word of predestination is to be referred unto that deep and hidden counsel of God, by which he has from everlasting, before the foundations of the world were laid, decreed to create mankind in true holiness and righteousness according to his own image. And that this is so, that Scripture witnesses in many places, and the event itself confirmed it by experience of the deed done. The second degree of predestination is, whereby God in his most just and most wise judgment determined to permit and suffer that mankind should be tempted of the devil, and should also fall into sin and eternal destruction.

Here it is inserted a certain digression of the fall of our first parents, which, although they consented unto the serpents persuasion by their own proper and voluntary will, and so fell from God, yet this their falling away, was not altogether without God’s eternal purpose. Chap. 6.

As God from everlasting did foresee and ordain all other things, so among these, this fall of mankind, in the person of our first parents, and all other evils which followed and flowed from thence. So that he was willing to suffer, and not to hinder this fall, that it might be done by others, and not by himself: otherwise, it had been even as easy for him to have kept our first parents from falling, as it was to create them. For look how easy it is for him to do that which he wills, so easy likewise is it for him to hinder that which he wills not, as Saint Augustine says [lib. Corrupt., & grat. ca. 56.]. Neither was it any injustice in him, but altogether just, in that he did not keep them from falling, but suffered them to be overcome by the serpent’s persuasion, and so to fall into eternal death.  For God was not bound unto them that he should preserve them and keep them from falling, because he did not promise it. Nay, God was not bound unto them, to create them according unto his own image, because he is a most free agent, therefore, much less was he bound unto them, to save them from falling. Yea, our first parents of their own voluntary and free-will, without any constraint, did treacherously fall away from God, and so falling away, did infect both themselves, and all their posterity with sin, and made them liable unto eternal destruction.

But God not unwillingly, but willingly permitted them to fall; otherwise, if anything, though never so little, could be brought to pass, God not being willing thereunto, then God should not be God. Our first parents therefore in regard of themselves, did that which God would not have, but in respect of the omnipotence of God, they could by no means do it. Wherefore it is not to be doubted, but that God does righteously, in suffering those things which are done so wickedly, as Saint Augustine says [Lib. De corrupt. & grat. capit. 100.] And although God do suffer this or that evil action to be committed and not hinder it: yet for all that, he does not himself bring to pass that evil, nor allow of it. But good things which are conformable to his heavenly wisdom, those he foresaw from everlasting, and decreed to bring to pass and effect them. Therefore God by himself is the first cause, and the only effecter of these things, because that good things spring and flow forth out of the power of his divine providence, as out of the only fountain that is never dried up. But evil things, although God also foresaw them from everlasting, and knew that they would come to pass, yet he himself, neither approves them, nor furthers them, nor helps them, nor brings them to pass directly, but by his just judgment suffers them to be committed and done by others. Therefore God is not to be counted as the first cause and effecter of them, but Satan himself, and man’s free-will do begin them and end them. So that Satan and wicked men are the true and proper causes of evil. All things therefore whatsoever are done, although they be done by God’s providence, from which nothing can be exempted, yet some of them are done, his providence permitting, appointing and directing them to their proper ends.  Therefore all evil and wicked deeds whatsoever, are committed and done, God’s providence not effecting, but suffering them, because that God decreed not that he would himself effect them from everlasting, but because he decreed to suffer, and not to hinder them to be done by others. So that God not unwillingly, but willingly suffered our first parents to sin. They therefore which attribute unto God a permission, which should be contrary to his will, they deny him to be omnipotent. For he that permits anything to be done, which by no means he would have done, surely he is not of such power, as to let and hinder that which he would not have done. Therefore what things soever God suffers to be done, he suffers them willingly, for nothing can be possibly be done, if he be unwilling, or against it. Hence it follows not, that God allows and approves sins in themselves, as they are things simply evil and contrary unto his will, but rather he hates them with his whole will and nature, and (except he mercifully pardon them) he revenges and punishes them with eternal torments.

Herman Renecher, The Golden Chayne of Salvation (At London: Printed by Valentine Simmes for Thomas Man, dwelling in Paternost row at the Signe of the Tablot, 1604), 22- 25.   [Some reformatting; some spelling modernized; marginal references cited inline; and underlining mine.] [Note: Rennecher’s continuing discussion on divine permission is also worth reading.]

Payne:

ELECTION.

THE PROOF OF THE DOCTRINE.

WE have shown in the preceding lecture, that the Arminian notion of a dispensation of the Spirit to all men, or of common grace conferred upon all men, to enable them to secure their salvation, does really involve in it the doctrine of election; and, further, that it does not sufficiently guard the doctrine of salvation by grace. I now proceed,

Thirdly, to observe, that this notion of common or universal grace is, as held by them, and as far as they have explained it, a self-contradictory, not to say, an absurd notion. It restores to man the ability (such is the view they give of it) to obey God’s law, to believe the gospel, and so to work out his own salvation. “Man,” says Bishop Tomline, “cannot, by his natural faculties and unassisted exertions, so counteract and correct the imperfection and corruption derived from the fall of Adam, as to be able of himself to acquire that true and lively faith which would secure his salvation.” He proceeds to state, in substance, that, as it would not be just in God to do more with a view to effect the salvation of one man than another, this ability to acquire true and lively faith is actually communicated to all men,–to those who believe not the gospel, and never will believe it, as well as to those who cordially receive it. In short, though his Lordship is not a proficient in the art of presenting an idea in a few unambiguous words, he evidently means that man has lost by the fall, not merely his disposition to do what God commands, and to believe what God reveals; but, in the true, and proper, and literal sense of the term, his power also. This is much more fully and distinctly stated by Mr. Watson, who, in perspicacity, infinitely surpasses the bishop, though, I fear, not in candor, especially when Calvinism rises upon his view, which almost invariably produces misrepresentations so gross, that, if the “Theological Institutes” have exalted my estimate of the intellect of the Writer, I am constrained to add–and I do it with deep and unaffected sorrow–they have diminished my previous conceptions of the moral dignity of his character.

I have hinted at an ambiguity which lurks in the words, power, ability, &c., when used in reference to man, and to what God requires of him. It may be expedient briefly to illustrate this point, before I lay before the reader the statements of Mr. Watson, as that illustration is adapted to show the inconsistent nature of those statements. A man then, let it be observed, may be destitute of power to perform a certain action, in two radically different senses;–in the sense of being destitute of the physical capacity of performing the action; and in the sense of wanting the disposition to perform it. A man who has not money, cannot give it to the destitute; a man who has not the present disposition to be liberal, cannot give it either, but the cannot in the two cases is radically different. No entreaties, or promises, are in the slightest degree adapted to remove the former, but they are eminently fitted to remove the latter, cannot; and may, accordingly, be consistently employed. Everyone recognizes and acts upon this distinction in the everyday occurrences of life; we require, therefore, that it should be recognized in religious subjects. The generality of Calvinistic divines make this distinction. They maintain that the power to obey God’s laws, of which unconverted men are destitute, is not physical capacity, but disposition. They affirm, that the Scriptures address no command to the human family at large, with which any man, unless he be an idiot or a madman, would be unable to comply, provided he had the disposition to comply. They hold, that all that Adam lost, for himself and his posterity, was the disposition, and not the physical capacity, i. e., power, in the proper sense of the word, to do what God commands: and, on the affirmed fact, that the human race, after the fall, retain their physical power to obey God’s law, though they may not choose to obey, they found their belief in the great doctrine of human accountability.

Mr. Watson, on the other hand, supposes that the race lost more than disposition–that they lost power, in the proper sense of the term, to obey; that this power is re-communicated to them by what we have designated common grace; and that this imparted grace is the foundation of accountability. 1 refer to the following passages in proof of these statements. ” All men, in their simply natural state, are dead in trespasses and sins, and have neither the will nor the power to turn to God.” (Vol. iii., p. 193.) In an attempt to show that absolute and unconditional reprobation (which doctrine 1 reprobate as strongly as does Mr. Watson) is contrary to the justice of God, he takes the ground, that “the reprobates must have been destroyed for a pure reason of sovereignty or for the sin of Adam–or for personal faults, resulting from a corruption of nature, which they brought into the world with them, and which they have no power to correct.” (Vol. iii., p. 69.) “All except Adam and Eve have come into the world with a nature which, left to itself, could not but sin.” (Vol. iii., p. 61.) Again, he tells us that the promise of the Spirit finds man “without the inclination, or the strength, to avail himself of proclaimed clemency.” (Vol. i., p.242.) Further; we are assured, (Vol. ii., p. 261,) “That a power of consideration, prayer, and turning to God, are the gifts of the Spirit; of course it does not exist in the simply natural state of man.” Now let it not be said that these statements of Mr. Watson contain no more than we every day assert, when w, say that man has lost his power to obey God’s law; because every reflecting Calvinist, at least, understands the term power in a sense different from that in which it is used by Mr. Watson. With the latter, the loss of power means, if not the loss of physical capacity, (I use this phraseology for a reason which will appear presently), at least more than the loss of disposition. With the former, it is the loss of disposition, and the loss of disposition only. Yet power to obey God’s law must be possessed by man, even in the opinion of Mr. Watson, for the unconverted, he himself tells us, “cannot be guilty of rejecting the gospel, if they have no power to embrace it;.” (Vol. iii., p. BO.) And, again, the unconverted are required to believe for their salvation; he consequently infers that they must have power to believe. (Vol. iii., p. 4.) This power common grace communicates, and its communication forms, as I have said, in Mr. Watson’s system, the ground of human accountability. The following extracts establish both these points. “The Scripture treats all men to whom the gospel is preached as endowed with power, not indeed from themselves, but from the grace of God, to turn at his reproof,” &c. (Vol. iii., p. Ill.) ” It follows, then, that the doctrine of the impartation of grace to the unconverted, in a sufficient degree to enable them to embrace the gospel, must be admitted,” &e. (Ibid.) “In consequence of the atonement of Christ, offered for all, the Holy Spirit is administered to all,” &c. (Vol. ii., p. 259.) “The presence of the Holy Spirit is now given to man, not as a creature; but is secured to him by the mercy and grace of a new and a different dispensation, under which the Spirit is administered,” not on the ground of our being creatures, but as redeemed from the curse of the law by him who became a curse for us.” (Vol. ii., p.257.) The virtues of the unregenerate are not, he says, “from man, but from God, whose Holy Spirit has been vouchsafed to the world through the atonement;.” (Ibid., p.261.) “It is thus,” he adds, finally, i. e., on account of the universal dispensation of the Spirit, “that one part of Scripture is reconciled to another, and both to fact; the declaration of man’s corruption, with the presumption of his power to return to God, to repent, to break off his sins, which all the commands and invitations to him, from. the gospel, imply;” without which power, thus communicated by grace, Mr. Watson imagines, these commands and entreaties could not be addressed to him.

Read the rest of this entry »

Review:

MERCY FOR ALL; or, the. Great Propitiation for Man. An Argument and an Appeal.
London: Ward and Co., Paternoster-row.

AN American production, small in compass, but grand and comprehensive in its grasp. It is written in no gold. leaf letters, but in characters of living fire.
The aim of the author ill to set forth the atonement of Christ in all its unconfined fulness of grace and virtue; but while he luxuriates in the fact that the provision of Divine mercy on behalf of man ill, from the very nature of the case, unlimited and illimitable, he yet restricts its results to the positive enjoyment of that redemption which ill the mighty boon of those only who believe. In his own words:—

There is a distinction to be always carefully maintained between the work of atonement and the work of redemption. The one does not necessarily imply the other; redemption includes atonement, but it includes more; it includes its actual results; it is the application of the atonement issuing in final and complete salvation. The one, therefore, in its nature may be more extensive than the other. An unredeemed sinner has even now a deep interest in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and, whether eventually lost or saved. will feel that interest through the ages of his deathless being. With this understanding, redemption certainly is not general; and to affirm that it is limited is but stating the plainly revealed fact, that all men will not be saved.

In the new which we take of the subject, moreover, we separate the nature of the atonement from any secret unrevealed purpose of the Infinite mind respecting its application. We do not deny the existence of such a purpose; so far from it that we cannot conceive of an intelligent, all-wise Being acting in anything without design, and we cannot, without detracting from the honor and glory of Him who is no less wise than holy in all His works, suppose otherwise than that in this great plan, and I may add effort, of forgiving mercy, He had in view some certain specific results. We do not believe that the issue of the atonement is in the Infinite Mind an open question. The results of a Redeemer’s work are not contingent results. They are absolutely certain. It ill fixed, unalterably fixed, that the Savior is to be rewarded for his life of toil and ignominy, and his death of shame and agony. He is to ‘see of the travail of his soul ad to be satisfied;’ and a multitude greater than any man can number, of those ‘who have washed their robes, and made them while in the blood of the Lamb,’ sha1l give grace and glory to His triumph. But the ultimate design of the atonement, as it exists in the mind of God is a very different thing from the nature of the atonement itself as it is spread out before our view upon the pages of revealed truth. The question before us is not what God intends to accomplish by virtue of the sacrifice of Christ; not how far the efficacy of that sacrifice will, in point of fact, reach; for upon these questions God has thrown a veil of impenetrable darkness; but what is the great moral, revea1ed purpose of the atonement? what ill its intrinsic value and sufficiency? how far is it available in its own nature to the salvation of man? Did God mean to spread it over only a put, or the whole of the race? Are men, all men, as lost sinners, so interested in the atoning death of Jesus Christ that they may, if they will, be saved by it! This is the question, and we unhesitatingly take the affirmative. Our position is, that through the sacrifice of Christ God can be just, and yet forgive. Such is the character of the atonement, that ‘it would comport with the glory of the Divine character, the sustentation of God’s government, the obligation and honor of His law, and the good of the rational and moral system, to save all men, provided they are accepted of Christ.’ ‘Every legal bar and obstruction in the way of the salvation of all men is removed.’ Such is the nature and efficacy of the atonement of the Son of God, that the relations not merely of some men, but of the entire race, are totally different from what they would have been, had the Savior never suffered and died; different, I mean, in this sense, that since this great atoning sacrifice has been offered, God can upon the ground of it consistency pardon the sins of all, and nothing now shuts a man out from forgiveness and hope but his own unwillingness to accept of the offers of mercy made to him in the gospel. Such is the view of the fullness of the atonement which we desire to advocate, and which we would fain commend to the intelligent faith of our hearers.

Christianity addresses itself to the intelligence as well as to the faith of man. Being a revelation of the Infinite Mind, it must be in harmony with universal reason. But if reason has become blinded and perverted, as is the case with man, then it speaks to his heart as well as to his intellect. It meets him on the ground of his moral consciousness, and tells him how a Savior has been provided for him in his far-off distance from God; how expiation has been made for his sins; how the path has been laid open for his return; and how from the lowest depth of his misery he may rise into perfect life and endless joy. Of these facts the little tractate now before us is a successful exposition, which we cordially recommend to all our readers.

Review of Mercy For All; or the Great Propitiation sufficient for man. An Argument and an Appeal (London: Ward and Co., Paternoster-Row), The Evangelical Magazine and Missionary Chronicle 32 (1854) : 648-649 (New Series). [Some spelling modernized; some reformatting; and underlining mine.] [Note: According to Worldcat, only two cataloged copies of this work are available, and they are both in the UK.]

Rennecher:

As often therefore, as any man thinks of God, let him remember his unspeakable goodness, and readiness to help, which can in no means separated, nor disjoined from God.

But many times those things that are proper unto man, are attributed unto him, because his properties cannot be comprehended of man: by the properties of man, as it were through a lattice, and so far made known unto him. So God does after a sort represent unto us, as in a glass, his spiritual and heavenly mysteries and hidden decrees, by a speech or affections of man. And thus God for his unspeakable loves sake toward mankind, does not think much to descend from his greatness, and from the throne of his majesty, and debase himself so low, as to apply himself to the capacity of a rude and frail man. And from hence is seen better then in any glass, how great care God takes for the salvation of mankind.

This mercy, is that most special goodness of God which is not bounded and restrained within the limits of this life, but stretches and reaches unto all eternity: so that it brings with it everlasting life, and eternal salvation; and contains and includes those only which are elected from everlasting, and those that shall be blessed for evermore. This differs very much from the general mercy of God, by which he cherishes and maintains all living creatures, to provide things necessary for them, and mercifully to guide and govern them. So that although God in his fatherly care for each of them: yet more especially God declares his goodness in mankind. For he does good, not only to the righteous and godly, but also the unjust and unthankful. For he makes the sun to rise upon the good and the bad, says Christ in Matthew, and in Luke [Mat. 5:45, Luke 6:23.] Such be benefits of God are temporal and common to the godly and to the wicked: so that out of them, God’s saving good-will cannot be known. For many abound here with the riches and honor, which yet come not to eternal life, as we may see the rich glutton [Luk. 13:19.], and in so may other.  And it is an other thing to elect in Christ those that were lost, to forgive their sins, and to draw them unto Christ by an effectual calling, to sanctify them by the power of his Spirit, and in the end, to crown them with eternal glory.

Herman Renecher, The Golden Chayne of Salvation, (At London: Printed by Valentine Simmes for Thomas Man, dwelling in Paternost row at the Signe of the Tablot, 1604), 55-56. [Some spelling modernized; marginal references cited inline; and underlining mine.]