they had been of us, they would have continued with us: but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us— s-Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen." Such were the doctrines of the old Calvinists, and such in substance are those of the present times. In this, how ever, as in every other denomination, there are considerable shades of difference. Some think Calvin, though right in the main, yet carried things too far: these are commonly known by the name of Moderate Calvinists. Others think he did not go far enough; and these are known by the name of High Calvinists. It is proper to add, that the Calvinistic system includes in it the doctrine of three co-ordinate persons in the Godhead, in one nature; and of two natures in Jesus Christ, forming one person. Justification by faith alone, or justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ, forms also an essential part of this system. They suppose that on the one hand * Jer. xxxii. 40. Mark xvi. 16. 1 John iii. 9. ii. 19. our sins are imputed to Christ, and on the other that we are justified by the imputation of Christ's righteousness to us; that is, Christ, the innocent, was treated by God as if he were guilty, that we, the guilty, might, out of regard to what he did and suffered, be treated as if we were innocent and righteous. Mr. John Evans, in his Sketch of different denominations, observes under the article Calvinists, that "to this denomination also belongs more particularly the doctrine of an atonement;" and which he states in such a manner as to convey the idea of its being the cause of the divine love. "This doctrine, (he observes, however) is disowned by some of their divines." Mr. Fuller, in his Calvinistic and Socinian Systems compared,† with other of their writers, as Mr. Evans acknowledges, "strongly reprobates" this idea; contending that the atonement is the effect, and not the cause of divine love; and it might have been added, insisting that the contrary is a gross misrepresentation of the Calvinists in general. Mr. E., however, thinks that the manner in which Dr. Watts has written of "the blood of Jesus calming the John iv. 14. Jude 24, 25, vi. 40. xvii, 3. † Letter vii. frowning face of the Father, &c.," and in which other Calvinistic writers have expressed themselves on this subject, is sufficient to prove that this is Calvinism; and therefore chuses to rank Mr. Fuller, and those writers who reprobate it, as uniting in this particular with the "Arians and Sabellians, who consider the death of Christ as simply a medium through which God has been pleased to exercise mercy towards the penitent." In answer to the former part of this statement, or what amounts to the same thing, a late author writes as follows: "The SENTIMENT of love is a very different thing from the EXPRESSION of that love. I do not believe that any respectable writer on our side says that a satisfaction, or an atonement to divine justice, was required as a motive to love and pity; but merely as a medium whereby that sentiment might be consistently manifested. No one supposes satisfaction for sins necessary to induce God to be merciful; though we do believe that that mercy could not be consistently manifested without an atonement." be in direct contradiction ta His meaning appears to have been much the same as that in Num. xxv. 11, where Phinehas is said to have turned away God's wrath from the children of Israel. This also was by an atonement offered to divine justice; an atonement which did not change the mind of God into what it was not before, but rendered it consistent with righteousness to manifest it. Hence he was in a manner the mediator between God and the people, and forgiveness was exercised to them for his sake. The above writer, in his notes at the end of the piece, adds as follows:-" Mr. Fuller is, I think, very unjustly ranked by Mr. Evans with Arians and Sabellians, as holding the atonement to be simply a medium through which God has been pleased to exercise mercy towards the penitent.' The passage to which Mr. Dr. Watts did not mean that Evans refers as the ground the blood of Jesus caused the of this statement, does indeed sentiment of compassion in the prove that Mr. F. considers divine mind; for this would the atonement not as the ”米 * Jerram's Letters on the Atonement. p. 23 66 cause of divine love, but the medium through which it flows; and the same is true of writers on his side the question in general, however their adversaries have distorted their sentiments. It is one thing, I conceive, to speak of the atonement as a medium," in opposition to a first cause, and another to hold it to be "simply a medium through which God has been pleased to exercise mercy to the penitent." By this statement one might suppose Mr. F. to hold that it is almost, if not altogether, a matter of indifference with the Almighty whether he exacted the penalty of sin or not; only that, all things considered, it might be as well to convey the blessings of salvation through the medium of Jesus Christ: a sentiment which has not the shadow of of the appearance in any writings of Mr. F. On the contrary, it is manifest that he holds with an atonement which neither Arians nor Sabellians will admit. He inaintains not only that God has been pleased to exercise mercy through this medium, but that it would be "inconsistent with righteousness" to exercise mercy without it. This is intimated in that very passage to which Mr. E. refers; where also the incapacity of God to shew mercy without an atone ment, is compared to that of a "righteous governor," who cannot remit the penalty of sin: and though he very properly uses the term medium, as opposed to a first cause of divine love, yet it is manifest from his writings that he considers the atonement as a medium of an especial kind. It pleases God to exercise mercy to us in thousands of instances through the medium of each other: but we do not obtain for each other eternal redemption, as he supposes Christ does. Mr. F. considers God as bestowing pardon, justification, and eternal life, as the reward of Christ's humiliation. (See Gospel its own Witness, 2nd. edit. pp. 199, 200: note.) Nor does Mr. F. say any thing about "mercy to the penitent," as if the benefits of the atonement were conferred in consequence of penitence; but (in the note just referred to) he considers penitence itself as bestowed by the holy Spirit out of regard to the atonement." p. 123. CAMERONIANS, a party in Scotland, who separated from the Presbyterians in 1666, and continued to hold their religious assemblies in the fields. The Cameronians took their denomination from Richard Cameron, a famous field preacher, who refused to ac- the reformed ministers, who cept the indulgence to tender judged Calvin's doctrines on consciences granted by King these points too harsh. A Charles the second, as such an contest between this denomiacceptance seemed an acknow- nation and the more rigid Calledgment of the king's supre- vinists, was carried on with macy, and that he had before great zeal, and a subtlety a right to silence them. Ca- scarce conceivable; yet the meron made a separation from only question between them his brethren, and even headed was, Whether the will of man a rebellion in which he was be determined by the immekilled. His party were never diate action of God upon it, entirely reduced till the revo- or by the intervention of a lution, when they voluntarily knowledge which God infuses submitted to King William. into the mind? The synod of CAMERONIANS, or CA- Dort had defined, that God MERONITES, is also the de- not only illuminates the unnomination of a party of Cal- derstanding, but gives action vinists in France, who asserted to the will, by making an that the will of man is only entire change therein. Camedetermined by the practical ron only admitted the illumijudgment of the mind; that nation whereby the mind is the cause of men's doing good morally moved, and explained or evil proceeds from the the sentiments of the synod of knowledge which God infuses Dort, so as to make the two into them; and that God does opinions consistent. not move the will physically, but only morally, in virtue of its dependence on the judgment of the mind. They derived this name from John Cameron, a famous professor, first at Glasgow, where he was born in 1580, and afterwards at Bordeaux and Samnur; at which last place he promulgated his doctrine of grace and free will, which was followed by Amyrant, Cappel, Bochart, Daille, and others a leaden image of the Virgin of the more learned among The followers of Cameron are sometimes called Universalists, as holding the universality of Christ's death, and sometimes Amraldists.* CAMISARS. See French Prophets. CAPUTIATI, a denomination which appeared in the twelfth century; so called from a singular kind of cap which distinguished their party. They wore upon their caps Mary, and declared publicly * Encyclopædia, vol. iv. p. 61. that their purpose was to level all distinctions, to abrogate magistracy, and to remove all subordination among mankind; and to restore that primitive liberty, that natural equality, which were the inestimable privileges of the first mortals.* CAROLOSTADIANS, so called from Carolostadt, a colleague of Luther. He denied the real presence in the eucharist, and declaimed against human learning.+ CARPOCRATIANS, a denomination which arose towards the middle of the second century; so called from Carpocrates, whose philosophical tenets agreed in general with those of the Egyptian Gnostics. He acknowledged the existence of a supreme God, and of the aions derived from him by successive generations. He maintained the eternity of a corrupt matter, and the creation of the world from thence by angelic powers, as also the divine origin of souls unhappily imprisoned in mortal bodies, &c. He asserted that Jesus was born of Joseph and Mary, according to the ordinary course of nature, and was distinguished from the rest of mankind by nothing but his superior fortitude and greatness of soul. It is said he held that lusts and passions, being implanted in our nature by God himself, were consequently void of guilt, and had nothing in them criminal; and not only allowed his disciples full liberty to sin, but recommended to them a vicious course of life, as a matter both of obligation and necessity; asserting that eternal salvation was only attainable by those who had committed all sorts of crimes, and had daringly filled up the measure of iniquity.§ He also taught that all things should be possessed in common. See Gnostics. CATAPHRYGIANS. See Montanists. CATHARISTS, a branch of the Manicheans in the twelfth century. This denomination agreed in the following points of doctrine; viz. That matter was the source of all evil-that the creator of this world was a being distinct from the supreme Deity that Christ was not clothed with a real body, neither could be properly said to have been born, or to have seen death— * Mosheim, vol. ii. p. 456,457, † Ib. vol. iv. p.28, 30, ‡ Ib. vol. i. p. 184, 185. Such is the representation which ecclesiaslical historians in general give of the morals of this denomination. Dr. Lardner, however, disputes its authority. It is difficult to obtain a true account of ancient sects, as their writings are chiefly lost. |