488 
* But though “ima Mater has been de- 
fective in this reipe@, fome of her fons, 
who have» ftudied the philofophy of Jan- 
guage, have fupplied the defe&t : they’ 
have cifentangled the Englith language 
from heterogeneous mixtures, and fhewn 
HS true ofiginand its proper excellencies. 
Of two works -of this kind, written “by’ 
two-acute and learned members of the’ 
Univerfity of Cambridge, we may pro- 
bably take the. liberty of faying fome- 
thing oma future occefion. | 
? CLXXX-—-CALVINISM. 
John Calvin was profeffor of divinity at 
Geneva, and. publiflied, anno 1559, a 
book, intitled Infiituta Chrifliane Religi- 
ents, containing the marrow of the doc- 
trine of predettination, and the other doc- 
trines connected with it. This work was 
veritten in early life, and is much indebt- 
ed to thewritings of Auguftin, who, ac- 
cording to Calvin; was ihe only man of all 
ihe ancients who kept within bounds in ex- 
tolling the faculties of the human will.— 
Calvin’s Inftitutes, however, is writ:en 
with eloquence, aid prefents a very com- 
pielicnfive view of his fubjeét.. The Dee 
dication to the King ef France has been 
gieatly adinired for its franknefs, and is 
iurpafled only by Robart Barclay’s Ad- 
drefs to Charles II. prefixcd to his Apology 
for the Quakers. Eut Calvin’s writings 
are, notwithftanding, dogmatical and {cur- 
rilous ; thofe whom he oppofes are canes, 
nebulones, beftie, diabcli; and one ot his 
devils he committed to the flames: and 
even the genile, the moderate Melanchton 
approved the godly deed: and even the 
enlighteneaSocinus impr foned as opponent, 
Such was the {pirit of ihe times! Intole- 
rance was the order of the day with al! ! 
The leading points in Calvin’s Infti- 
tutes are thele :—‘* Adz lapfu et defec- 
tione totum humanum genus maledicti- 
oni fufie addiium, et a prima origine de. 
gencrafle—Hominem  arbitrii libertate, 
in rebus ad Deum pertinentibus, nune 
efle {poliatum.—Ex corrupta hominis na- 
tura, nihil nifi dammabile prodire.—Homi- 
nem juftificari coram Deo fide in Chrifti 
meritis fine operibus.—Eleétione zterna 
alios ad falutem, alios adinteritum Deum 
predettinaffe.—Ele€&tionem fanciri Dei vo- 
catione: Perfeverentiam electorum tan- 
tum propriam.” 
But what has Calvinifm to do with the 
Univerfity ot Cambridge ? Clearly this.— 
The Articles of the Church of England 
are Calviniftic ; and confequently.: it will» 
fall in our way to {peak of jome men 
of nur literary republic, diftinguith- 
ed for talents and Je:rning, who have fa- 
Cantabrigiana. 
[June 1; 
voured that do€trine,; as we have, on @ 
former occafion, of Catholics, Puritans,’ 
Arians, Socinians, &c. ; 
But how does it appear that the arti-. 
cles‘ of the Church dte Calviniftic > A‘ 
comparifon of ihe articles themfelves with. 
the points above quoted, fufficiently thew 
it; and the writings of the reformers {til 
further prove it; wont 
But this has been denied by many : 
and Dr. Kipling; the deputy-profeflor: 
of divinity, at Cambridge, wrote a-pam- 
phlet, two or three years ago, to prove’ 
thecontrary pofition, viz. that the thirty- 
nine articles are to be underftood in the 
Arminian fen{= Would Calvinit divines 
lay down Armiinian articles ? 
If the articles themfelves, and the, 
writings of the reforme:s, do not afford 
fuficient proof, that the articles were 
given originally in the Calvmittic fenfe, 
let the following confiderations be taken. 
into the account, and it amounts fo de- 
monfration. 
Jobn Caivin obtained fo much autho. 
rity in his time, as to givea name almiit 
to all the churches whitly feparated from 
the Romifh communion. 
‘© Ob le grand bommc! il wy a ancien & 
comparer Glut. Il af bien entendu lé/cri- 
ture! SoLus CaLVINUS IN THEOLO= 
Gics,” exclaims even. Scaliger. ‘The re- 
formed, at firit, or the pretended reform- 
ed, as the Catholics cailed them, almoft all 
favoured Calvin’s doétrines, and prided: 
themtelves in having as good a uniformity 
of faith as the Church of Rome-itfelf.— 
They even publifhed a concord of. faiths,. 
a corpus confeffionum, and thefe may all be- 
feen in Quick’s Sywadicon. They are ail 
Calvia:ftic, and the confeflion of the 
Church of Engiand may be found among 
them. 
To this may be added, ftill later, what 
Mr. Collins fays in a Difcourfe of Free- 
thinking. Our priefts ‘* for many, years 
after the Reformation, were generally 
Calvinitts, or Predcftinarians, as 1s evi-: 
dent—from the Bibles printed in Queen 
lizabetb’s time, to which are often an- 
nexed, an Apology for Predeftination ;— 
from the fuffrage of the divines cf Great. 
Britain, delivered by them to the fynod of 
Dort, March 16, 1619, as the fenfe of. 
the Church of England, where the fve 
points, as they are called, are all deter- 
mined on the Calvinittical fide, agreeably 
to the decifions of that holy fynod—and 
laftly, trom all their books to the time of . 
Bihhop Laud.” And let this fuffice for. 
‘the doctrineof thofe who taught it here- 
afer. 
CLXAXKX!Ie 
