conclude in the words of* FELTHAM in his answer to WILLIAM JOHNSON the Jesuit, who charges the Protestants thus," Do not Pro"testants derogate from God's glory, making "him the author of sin, and that he predesti

To

nates men to eternal death by his only will, "without any fault?" Referring in the margin to several places in CALVIN'S Institutes. which FELTHAM replies," For † predestina"tion you urge CALVIN. But, Sir, the church "of England is not bound to his tenets, nor do "I hold my faith from him, but from my "blessed Saviour and his Apostles. Let it suf

fice, I hold man fallen to be the subject of predestination. I believe no man saved but by God's mercy: no man damned but by his " own default."

66

THE CONCLUSION.

The several periods of time proper to be considered, in order to give a full history of our. XVIIth Article, and the doctrine it contains, are-First, the period immediately preceding the Reformation. Secondly, the commencement of the Reformation under Henry VIII.-Thirdly,

-

*Feltham's Resolves, fol. p. 77.

↑ Ib. p. 81.

the

the progress made in it during the time of Edward VI.-Fourthly, the completion of it in Elizabeth's time.-And fifthly, the several strug→ gles with regard to this doctrine, during the reigns of James I. and Charles I.

The learned * Dean of Gloucester has considered the first period, and, by way of consequence, "lays it down as a most solemn truth, " that at the time just preceding the Reformation, the church of Rome, in respect to pre"destination, grace, freewill, and perseverance, "was was truly Calvinistical." He has likewise stated both sides of the questions relating to the FIVE POINTS, and compared them severally with the public offices of the church of England, in her liturgy; and clearly evinced, that in them she has given no countenance to the Calvinistical sense of them.

These papers are confined to the times of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. The first notice that is taken of the rigid doctrine of predestination is in the NECESSARY DOCTRINE, &c. where it is carefully guarded against, by establishing a different doctrine. This work was a publick act of the church at that time,

* Dean Tucker in his letters to Dr. Kippis, p. 81, &c.

con

confirmed by act of Parliament. The same per sons that were concerned at this period of the Reformation, were the principal agents in the more happy one of Edward VI. Here the work went on with the full concurrence of the Crown: The articles, homilies, and liturgy were now framed and established. CRANMER was the great superintender of the whole. The arti cles were principally his work, aided and assisted with the learning and abilities of RIDLEY. The article under consideration was first suggested to them by MELANCTHON, and the shocking consequences drawn from the rigid doctrine by the GOSPELLERS here, made it more immediately necessary to be taken notice of in the confession drawn up for the use of the church of England. The XVIIth Article there fore was intended as a guard both against their doctrine and the consequences they drew from it. The moderation with which it was drawn is admirable. Calvin was now carrying on the Reformation with great vigour, and at the same time establishing his doctrine of the divine decrees with no less. His great use in lowering the power of the church of Rome, and forwarding the Reformation, obliged our Reformers to exercise their usual modera tion in framing this article. They define the doctrine in the words of scripture, without any com

ment

ment of their own; with great address distinguish out two different senses of the doctrine; show us the way how we are to judge ourselves included under the one, and point out the fatal consequences of the other; and at last refer us to God's promises as generally set forth in the holy scripture, and direct us to the proper rule

of our lives and conversation.

Concurrent with the Articles the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws was carried on. CRANMER was at the head of this work likewise. After laying down the positive doctrines of the gospel, the REFORMATIO LEGUM proceeds to guard against the heresies. Several of these are particularly mentioned. Amongst the rest the rigid doctrine of predestination, with the consequences drawn from it, has a place. Here the whole is more explicit than in the article. By the manner of drawing up this chapter, it appears that our Reformers were more intent upon guarding against the fatal consequences of this doctrine than in delivering one of their own. In short, it is probable that they were more particular in this Digest of the Ecclesiastical Laws, as it was intended for the internal regimen of the church; whereas the articles were considered not only in that light, but as a declaration to the church of Rome, and the rest of the Christian world, that

when we threw off her yoke, we professed the doctrine of the Gospel.

Both before and during the time of drawing up the Articles and Ecclesiastical Laws, LATIMER and HOOPER, in their popular discourses, were guarding the people against the rigid doctrine and its fatal consequences.-Last of all, when BRADFORD, in consequence of the disputes amongst the prisoners in Queen Mary's time drew up a state of this doctrine to be laid before them, and applied to CRANMER, RIDLEY, and LATIMER to give their sanction to it: these three bishops refused to sign it, judging, no doubt, that he had gone to far.

Upon the whole, it cannot be imagined, that our Article was drawn up agreeable to the principles of CALVIN.

The last period, under the reigns of Elizabeth, James I. and Charles I. is fully considered by the learned Dr. Waterland. During this period many of our divines having, under Queen Mary's persecution, been thrown into the bosom of CALVIN; and in James's time the remarkable transactions at the synod of Dort happening;

* Supplement to Arian Subscription, p. 43, &c.

and