Louis Le Blanc On Reprobation in the Reformed School (Theses 52-57)
Le Blanc on the Cause of Reprobation among the Reformed Infralapsarians
1-6. 7-11. 12-16. 17-23. 24-29. 30-36. 37-43. 44-47. 48-51.
52. But regarding those theologians who teach that reprobation, at least absolutely considered, has a cause, motive, or reason in the foreseen sin of men, many of them do not explain what sin they have in mind—whether only original, or also actual, and whether only final impenitence or also other sins. Nevertheless, the most celebrated du Moulin in his Anatomy of Arminianism ch. 26, after he had asserted in numbers 6 and 7 that sin is the meritorious cause of reprobation, yet is not the discriminating cause among the elect and reprobates, asserts in the following paragraph that men are not merely reprobated on account of the sin contracted from Adam, and on account of the fall, which things are common to both the reprobate and elect, but also on account of actual sins, which have been committed during the course of one’s whole life.
53. But we should state not what perhaps each person might believe, but what doctrine follows from each person, and what is necessary to be believed by each person, if one wishes to stand on proper principles, given that, according to the greatest part of the Reformed doctors, and especially of those to whom the Synod of Dordt is worth something, the object of reprobation in its totality and insofar as all of its acts are considered, is human kind as fallen in Adam, and infected by original sin, but not men as already contaminated with actual sins and vices; they necessarily have to say that as far as its first act, which is preterition or non-election, it has no preceding consideration of any sin, except original, and thus if they say that there is some merit or dignity in man regarding preterition and non-election absolutely considered, they ought then to refer that whole thing to original sin.
54. But indeed, if reprobation is considered as the second act, which is predamnation, and a certain ordination to eternal death, given that they say that someone is damned on account of those same foreseen sins on account of which a person was from eternity, by the decree of God, ordained and destined to damnation, then it is clear that men are damned not on account of original sin alone, but on account of whatever actual sins are committed in the whole course of one’s life—indeed no one is damned unless he perseveres in his sins unto the very end in death. From this it follows that according to their position, reprobation, as it considers the former act and as it conceives that latter act, as a preordination of certain men to eternal death and everlasting punishments, was not made except on account of foreseen perseverance in final sin, and thus on account of that and with respect to it.
55. Whence it is able to be clearly and openly concluded that final perseverance in sin is a cause and reason of reprobation, according to its final act, not only when reprobation is considered absolutely, but also when it is comparatively considered. For God does not simply damn this or that person because he died in sin, but also when it is asked why God assigned this person rather than that person to eternal death, one is able to rightly and truly respond that God does this because this one died in sin, but that one was restored from sin before death. And in the same way those doctors about whom we now treat conclude that as God damns men on account of sin in which they persevere to death, so also, he decreed to damn them on account of the same sin, so they also ought to conclude that as God damns this one instead of that one, because this one finished his life in sin rather than that one, so also, he decreed to damn this one rather than that one because he foresaw this one would finish his life in sin rather than that one.
56. But those who want the object of election and reprobation to be men called to participate in the grace of Christ or through the express and explicit preaching of the Gospel or in some other way, they are able to admit not only original sin, but also actual sins, and vices contracted voluntarily by a person, to be the cause of reprobation, not only regarding the second act which is predamnation, but also according to the first act which is preterition, at least when reprobation is absolutely considered. For if God in electing and reprobating men considered them as resisting the divine call, as far as it is in their hands and if they are left to themselves, he without a doubt sees those whom he rejects worthy of it, not only with respect to original sin in which they are conceived and born, but also with respect to actual sins in which they voluntarily pollute and contaminate themselves. Though, he sees nothing worthy in them why he should convert this person rather than that one or leave this one in his native depravity and stubbornness rather than that one.
57. From these things it is indeed concluded that the more common and justifiable view about the cause of reprobation in the Reformed schools is that view which says that reprobation, taken as that act which is preterition or non-election, indeed has some merit or reason on the part of reprobated man, if reprobation is looked at absolutely or in itself. But it does not have one, if looked at comparatively. But if that other act which is predamnation or destination to death is being treated of, them perseverance of man in sin is the cause and merit of it, in whatever way it is considered.