The following excerpt was taken from Fragments of an Answer to the Letter of Certain English Protestants found in the Keble edition of Richard Hooker's Works, Book V, Appendix 1, 46.
+++++++++++
"One thing further also we must note, touching obduration: that there may be in man such malice, as maketh him the child of eternal death, and yet not always such cause, as induceth God perpetually to withhold his grace: which difference between the act of reprobation and obduration is the more necessary to be well observed, in regard of those things, which the Scripture hath concerning sin against the Holy Ghost, and the sin of apostasy after grace. For we need not doubt of the cause of reprobation in them, touching whom the Apostle hath said, they crucify again unto themselves the Son of God, and make mock of him. And yet, that in them God did not always see cause to withhold his Holy Spirit, appeareth as much as the same men were once enlightened, and had been partakers of the heavenly gift of the Holy Ghost, and had tasted of the good word of God, and of the power of the world to come. On the other side, perpetuity of inward grace belongeth unto none, but eternally foreseen elect, whose difference from castaways, in this life, doth not herein consist, that the one have grace always, the other never: but in this, that the one have grace that abideth, the other either not grace at all, or else grace which abideth not." [Emphasis in text]
2 comments:
Yes, indeed, Mark. And on this point Arminius was closer to Calvin than was Dort.
I posted this entry and the last because I'm simply tired of hearing how "Calvinistic" the Church of England was at the Reformation.
Hooker, like many churchman of his era, was not dependent on Calvin as much as he was on Augustine. Many scholars in England read and studied Calvin for the same reason (because Calvin was so dependent on Augustine). Things change decisively after Dort.
Thanks, Mark. I'm going to lift this quote to post in another forum.
Post a Comment