Interestingly enough, in order to understand what “predestination” means in the Articles contra the 1689 we need to look back at Baptism. In Article XXVII: Of Baptism we find the language of regeneration, language wholly missing from the 1689. Understanding the meaning of regeneration yields the prize of understanding language as it pertains to predestination. For the specific differences in reference to this issue we turn again to Browne:
Another objection is drawn from the Calvinistic scheme. Baptismal grace is supposed to contradict the doctrine of final perseverance. The Calvinistic scheme teaches, that grace is always irresistible, and that grace once given always abides. The soul, once in a state of grace, is always in a state of grace. If therefore grace was given at baptism, it can never fail.
The most rigid form of Calvinism might make this inevitable. Yet, very high predestinarians have thought otherwise. Augustine held that persons might be predestined to grace, but not to perseverance; nay, that they might be ordained to persevere for a time, yet not to the end.[1]
Thus, there is a distinction among those in Baptism of those who may be in covenant for a time and those who will persevere to the end. Although they are predestined to their final state, there is, from our narrow earthly perspective, a state of flux in between. Among those whom we should remember when dealing with predestination are those predestined to eternal life who may not claim that reward until very near their end. These in an eternal sense are as elect and as sure in that election as any, but to us will often appear as heathens. These are, to coin a phrase, the “proto-elect” and a sure reason for a pastoral approach to the doctrine of election. Pastors cannot know in their congregations who are predestined to grace and who is predestined to life, neither can they know among people met on the street who among those they meet, regardless of how they appear at that specific point in time, are ultimately elect of God.
