never heard of the doctrine of Augustinian or Calvinistic Election. But Mr. Milner, while he allows the piety of the martyr; while he admits him to have been unquestionably sound in fundamentals; while he cannot deny, that, if the doctrine of Augustinian Election had been really delivered to the Church by the Apostles, Justin, in his day, must have infallibly known such to be the case; nay while he himself would fain exhibit Justin as a sort of internally convinced, though (on such an hypothesis) a most unaccountably and most superfluously concealed, Calvinist, who, in various parts of his writings, IMPLIES the doctrine of that species of Election: Mr. Milner, under all these circumstances, and in direct inconsistency with the last of them, would solve the problem of Justin's silence, on the plea; that He had DEPARTED from the primitive faith through his love of Philosophy. This, then, is Mr. Milner's solution of a known and felt difficulty. Though Justin involved the doctrine of Calvinistic Election in his experience, and implied it in various parts of his writings: yet his love of Philosophy not only forbad him explicitly to own it, but even actually produced notions on the subject not altogether agreeable to the genius of the Gospel. Such, in the form of a solution, are the strangely inconsistent results, which Mr. Milner brings out of Justin's alleged love of Philosophy. Meanwhile, as if to make confusion still worse confounded, Justin himself, after his conversion to Christianity, actually treats this same Philosophy with utter and studied and repeated and systematic contempt *. Surely, a man must be determined, at all hazards, to persuade himself, that Augustinian Election was the doctrine delivered by the Apostles to the strictly Primitive Church, if he can be satisfied with a solution: which exhibits Justin, as being so mightily under the influence of a professedly discarded and despised Philosophy, as to disown, for its sake, a doctrine then (by the theory) universally and certainly known to be apostolical; and which makes him, at once, pretermit through philosophical dislike, and yet nevertheless involve and imply, the self-same Scheme of doctrinal exposition. The whole of this is an inconsistency, not happy, but, in the case and age of Justin, I should think, absolutely impossible. 3. There is one matter yet to be noticed, before the present topic is dismissed. Justin, says Mr. Milner, never explicitly owns the doctrine of Election. This assertion, as I have already observed, is * Justin. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 172, 173, 174. Cohort. ad Græc. p. 3, 4, 6, 7. perfectly true; if, by the term Election, we understand Augustinian Election: but it is NOT true; if, by the term Election, we understand Election according to Justin's own view view of the doc trine. In such a sense of the word, Justin is so far from never explicitly owning the doctrine of Election, that he twice, in his Dialogue with Trypho, both unreservedly acknowledges it, and distinctly gives its meaning. We Christians are по mere contemptible mob:- but GOD HATH ALSO ELECTED US; and hath manifested himself to those, who inquired not after him.-Through the like calling that he called Abraham, charging him to go out from the land in which he dwelt; through that voice HE HATH CALLED ALL OF US: and we have now come out from the polity in which we lived, living wickedly according to the common practices of the other inhabitants of the earth * *. Inasmuch as he took out of all nations the nation of the Jews, a nation useless and disobedient and faithless he hath shewn, that THOSE * Οὐκοῦν οὐκ εὐκαταφρόνητος δῆμος ἐσμὲν· ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐξελέξατο ὁ Θεὸς, καὶ ἐμφανὴς ἐγενήθη τοῖς μὴ ἐπερωτῶσιν αὐτὸν.—Διὰ τῆς ὁμοίας κλήσεως φωνῇ ἐκάλεσεν αὐτὸν ( ̓Αβραὰμ), εἰπὼν ἐξελθεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἐν ᾗ ᾤκει· καὶ ἡμᾶς δὲ ἅπαντας, δι ̓ ἐκείνης τῆς φωνῆς ἐκάλεσε· καὶ ἐξήλθομεν ἤδη ἀπὸ τῆς πολιτείας ἐν ᾗ ἐζῶμεν, κατὰ τὰ κοινὰ τῶν ἄλλων Tĥs yns оiкητóρwv kakŵs (@vтes. Justin. Dial. cum Tryph. Oper. τῆς γῆς οἰκητόρων κακῶς ζῶντες. p. 272. WHO HAVE BEEN ELECTED OUT OF EVERY NATION are, through Christ, obedient to his counsel*. From these two perfectly unambiguous passages, we learn, with abundant clearness, Justin's view of the scriptural doctrine of Election. He evidently understood it, precisely in the same sense as it was understood by Clement the friend and fellowlabourer of St. Paul; and, I may add, in the same sense as it was understood by Ignatius the martyred disciple of St. John t. Justin, who was taught by the immediate successors of the Apostles, apprehended God's Elect to be: The whole body of Christians, called and brought out of all nations into the pale of the visible Church, so as there to constitute one Chosen Nation or Polity; after the same manner, and according to the same IDEALITY, as the Israelites had been called and chosen out of all nations to be God's Elect and Peculiar and Privileged People. When Mr. Milner stated, that Justin never explicitly owns the doctrine of Election, he ought, I think, to have also stated that Justin DOES explicitly own the doctrine of Election, though not as that doctrine was subsequently expounded by Augustine and Calvin. * Εκ πάντων δὲ τῶν γενῶν, γένος ἑαυτῷ λαβὼν τὸ ὑμέτερον, γένος ἄχρηστον καὶ ἀπειθὲς καὶ ἄπιστον, δείξας τοὺς ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους αἱρουμένους πεπεῖσθαι αὐτοῦ τῇ βουλῇ διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Justin. Dial. cum Tryph. Oper. p. 282. See above, book i. chap. 9. § II. CHAPTER XI. THE DOCTRINE OF FREE WILL, AS UNDERSTOOD BY JUSTIN MARTYR AND THE EARLY FATHERS OF THE CHURCH. In association with a philosophic spirit, which forbad Justin explicitly to own the doctrine of Election as it was subsequently explained by Augustine, though that same philosophic spirit did not prevent him from involving it in his experience and even implying it in various parts of his writings, Mr. Milner alleges that He was the first sincere Christian, who introduced into the Church the foreign plant of Free Will; using the same kind of reasoning on the subject, as that, which, in modern times, has been fashionable since the days of Arminius. The charge, thus brought against Justin, leads us into the evidential or historical discussion of a very important subject. I say evidential or historical, designedly and advisedly: for, as to any abstract or metaphysical discussion of the much vexed topic of Free Will, I decline such a task altogether; both because it is entirely foreign to the plan of the |