If, without that conformity, a man deem himself one of the Elect merely because he has an internal feeling that this is the case: such an individual may well be a subject of our hearty intercessory prayer; but he has placed himself out of the pale of any reasoning founded upon Scripture. he is one of God's Elect, save from the evidence of final perseverance as well as of present holiness. Hence I am at a loss to discern, how Calvinism can impart, to any individual Calvinist, that special comfort which it is said to impart. The Divines of Dort pronounce, that the Elect, each in due time, become assured of their Election: but still they determine, that this assurance must spring from their producing the infallible fruits of Election, not from a curious prying into God's secret decrees. Thus again we are brought precisely to the same test, as that which is equally insisted upon by their opponents. De hac æterna et immutabili sui ad salutem electione, electi suo tempore, variis licet gradibus et dispari mensura, certiores redduntur: non quidem arcana et profunditates Dei curiosè scrutando; sed fructus electionis infallibiles, in verbo Dei designatos, ut sunt vera in Christum fides, filialis Dei timor, dolor de peccatis secundum Deum, esuries et sitis justitiæ, in sese, cum spirituali gaudio et sancta voluptate, observando. Judic. Synod. Dord. cap. i. § 12. Syllog. Confess. p. 408. BOOK II. THE POSITIVE TESTIMONY OF HISTORY IN REGARD TO THE TRUE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF ELECTION AND PREDESTINATION. A Primitiva Ecclesia, ab Apostolis, a Christo, non discessimus. Juell. Apol. Eccles. Anglican. apud Enchir. Theol. vol. i. p. 295. CHAPTER I. THE HISTORICAL OR EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF CONTROVERSY. IN the Primitive Church, no feature is more remarkable, than the jealous accuracy with which she guarded sound doctrine and noted the rise and progress of error. As soon as ever a departure from the truth occurred, it was instantly pointed out and exposed: and, in consequence of this jealous inspection, we have the early heresies described and classified with the utmost precision and exactness *. To a certain extent, this supervision prevails in every age and, indeed, it is well nigh impossible, that a marked departure from an universally received System of Doctrine should occur without exciting both observation and animadversion. Now, when observation and animadversion are brought into active operation, the result is Theological Controversy. See my Apostolicity of Trinitarianism, book i. chap. 6 in init. Hence, as the occurrence of Theological Controversy, on any topic, affords sure and certain evidence, that at least two clashing Systems of Opinion must then have been in existence: so the non-occurrence of Theological Controversy, on any topic, equally affords sure and certain evidence, that only a single System of Opinion was then in existence; or, at least, that, during the period in question, provided the great outline of ORIGINAL IDEALITY was preserved, subordinate or plausible innovations might easily pass without attracting any special attention. These remarks may, I think, be profitably employed, both in estimating the claims of either Calvinism or Arminianism or Nationalism to genuine apostolicity, and in contrastedly introducing that Primitive Scheme of the doctrine of Election, which (so far as I can find) never varied, in point of IDEALITY, down even to the time of Augustine, though, in point of CAUSATION, a variety, so plausible as not to excite controversy, crept in about the end of the second century under the patronage of the Alexandrian Clement. I. I shall begin with employing the remarks before us, in estimating the claims of either Calvinism or Arminianism or Nationalism genuine apostolicity. 1. On the alleged testimony of Ignatius and the Roman Clement, Mr. Milner, we have seen, contends that Election, as Election was sub |