HOME | contents | election: to responsibility | to life (St Augustine) | to life & death (Calvin) | by foreseen merit (Arminius) | conclusion | top
In the period of the Reformation sharp controversy raged around the mysterious
question of predestination and election.
We are not now so dogmatic about it, and it may be treated briefly.
Election to the privilege of responsibility for others,
or ecclesiastical predestination,
is clearly taught by the Bible and by the Church.
The Hebrews in the Old Testament were the chosen (elect) people.
They were given the privilege of being God's people,
but not for their own merits or for their own advantages only.
[Jonah 4.11; Zech.8.23; Mal.1.11; etc.]
In the New Testament the Christian Church is the chosen people,
the new Israel (Phil.3.3; James 1.1; etc.).
The elect are the baptized, as they had been the circumcised;
and it is the baptized only who are the elect (Rom.6.3).
The language used of Israel in Ex.19.5,
ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto Me from among all peoples ...
ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation,
is applied in Titus 2.14 to the Christian Church,
a people for His own possession,
cf. I Peter 2.9:
ye are an elect race, a royal priesthood, an holy nation,
and Rev.1.6:
He made us to be a kingdom, to be priests unto His God and Father.
St. Paul addresses the Roman Christians as "called
to be Jesus Christ's",
and the Corinthians as "called to be saints".
St. Peter addresses his Epistle to "the elect who
are sojourners of the dispersion", and St. Jude to "them
that are called".
Since the New Testament everywhere assumes that all Christians are baptized,
the elect are the same as the baptized.
The Apostolic Fathers also understood the word "elect" in this
sense.
St. Clement of Rome uses the word "elect" in this sense.
St. Ignatius addresses the Church of Tralles as "elect".
St. Irenaeus says "the Word of God, who formerly chose the patriarchs,
has now chosen us" (Against Heresies, 4. 58).
The Book of Common Prayer uses the word in this sense;
in the Collect for All Saints, Day we say,
Who hast knit together Thine elect in one communion and fellowship;
in the Catechism,
I believe in God the Holy Ghost,
who sanctifieth me and all the elect people of God;
in the Order of Baptism we pray,
that this child, now to be baptized ...
may ever remain in the number of Thy faithful and elect
children;
in the Burial Service,
accomplish the number of Thine elect,
which is based on a passage in the Epistle of St. Clement,
"that the number of His elect should be saved with mercy and compassion".
[Dr. Kirsopp Lake's emendation and translation.]
In all these cases, except possibly the last, the elect are the baptized.
Election to the privilege of baptism does not imply that the elect will be
finally saved.
Even St. Paul contemplated the possibility of his rejection
(I Cor.9.27: cf. Phil.2.12; Heb.6.4-8).
The Calvinist doctrine of final perseverance that every one who is once saved
is saved forever and cannot be lost is contrary to the New Testament.
top
There are, however, some passages which suggest that election may mean more than election to privilege e.g.,
Matt.24.24: "so as to deceive, if possible, even the elect";
Luke 10.20: "Rejoice, because your names are written in heaven".
When, however, they are set beside other passages which teach that salvation
is offered to us on conditions, not absolutely,
we see that they mean no
more than that God wishes to save all men;
but that as He has given men free
will, they are able to thwart His desire for them.
St. Augustine, influenced by his controversy with the Pelagians,
held that some men are predestined or chosen (elected) by God
not only to privilege
but to eternal life.
Why God should predestine some and not others is, according to him, unknown
to us.
It is hidden in the inscrutable will of God.
The reason is not "foreseen faith" (see below),
and only those can be saved who are given "final perseverance".
This theory is based upon Rom.9-11 and has exercised enormous influence.
It cannot be separated from St. Augustine's theory of transmitted guilt (see p.
157),
which we have found good reasons for rejecting;
and the truth that is contained in it
must be qualified by the free will and responsibility of man.
It is by no means certain that what St. Paul says about God's predestination
of individuals, such as Esau and Jacob (Rom.9.10-13), refers to life hereafter
at all.
Certainly the passage in Genesis refers to this life only,
for the future life was not yet revealed.
The "vessels of wrath fitted for destruction" (Rom.9.22) may be
persons whose sins bring them to ruin in this life,
not necessarily persons who will be finally lost hereafter.
top
Calvin carried the teaching of St. Augustine further.
He taught, as St. Augustine did not teach,
that some are predestined to condemnation or reprobation;
and that our Lord did not die for all mankind but only for the elect.
These beliefs are directly contrary to John 3.16-17:
God so loved the world,
that He gave His only-begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish,
but have eternal life;
for God sent not His Son into the world to judge the world,
but that the world might be saved through Him;
and I Tim.2.3-6:
God will have all men to be saved.
The doctrine of Calvin led to the opposition of Arminius (Hermann),
a Dutch Reformed theologian who taught that predestination to life was not
arbitrary (as St. Augustine and Calvin held),
but was due to foreseen faith.
God foresaw that certain persons would have faith to be saved and therefore
predestined them to salvation.
This opinion was not confined to Arminius.
It seems to have been held by some of the Greek Fathers,
by St. Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 7. 17, 107),
Origen, St. John Chrysostom (Homilies on Romans, 16);
perhaps also by St. Ambrose and St. Jerome among the Latin Fathers;
also by the Jesuit divines Maldonatus, Lessius, Vasquez, and Suarez.
But the only passage of Scripture that can be quoted in support of it is
Rom.8.28-29,
and then only if it is misinterpreted;
for it is God's purpose,
not man's free choice,
that is meant by the words κατὰ
πρόθεσιν, according to purpose;
and the "foreknowledge" means God's taking note of such persons,
not His foreknowledge of their character and fitness.
Other passages make the theory of foreseen merit untenable
(see Deut.9.5; I Sam.12.22; Mal.1.3; Rom.5.10-13).
The great Hugo Grotius, the father of international law, supported arminianism
but at the Synod of Dort (1618) the (Calvinist) Dutch Reformed Church condemned
it.
Its supporters, who were called the Remonstrants, then formed a separate
denomination that still exists in Holland.
("Arminian" was a nickname commonly, but wrongly, applied to Archbishop
Laud and his followers by their Calvinist adversaries.)
top
The only kind of election or predestination, which we can accept with certainty,
is election to the privilege of membership of the Church by baptism.
God intends all men for life and gives His grace and salvation to all who
accept His conditions.
No one can deserve salvation.
We have no merits of our own.
All that is good in us is God's gift.
But we are responsible for our choice.
We can accept God's offer or reject it.
The Anglican Article 17 is highly Augustinian.
It quotes Rom.8, 9, and Eph.1, in the sense given to them by St. Augustine.
But it is not Calvinistic.
It says nothing about election to damnation.
Its last paragraph warns its readers not interpret the texts on which the
Calvinists based their doctrines in a sense contrary to other parts of Scripture
which apply God's promises to all men, not only to some men.
[On this subject see E. C. S. Gibson, Thirty-Nine Articles,
pp. 465-487.]
top