The Decree of Reprobation
Does God positively decree the damnation of the reprobate, or merely pass them by?
Settled clearly
Background
Reformed theology had always held that God's eternal counsel concerns both the elect and the non-elect, but how that was to be stated varied sharply. The hardest reading — Beza's, sometimes Twisse's — described reprobation as a positive divine decree, parallel to election: God positively decrees the damnation of the reprobate as an end. The milder reading — Calvin's late *Institutes*, the Synod of Dort, most English divines — distinguished *preterition* (God's passing by the non-elect) from *praedamnation* (the just condemnation that follows on the non-elect's sin). On the milder reading, election is positive and reprobation is just.
The Assembly’s handling
The Assembly took the milder line but with a sharpening clause about the divine decree itself. WCF III.7 distinguishes preterition (God 'was pleased…to pass by') from the eventual condemnation ('to ordain them to dishonor and wrath *for their sin*'). The 'for their sin' clause secures that the execution of reprobation is just — the non-elect are condemned for their sin, not despite their innocence — while the 'pass by' language keeps the eternal decree's asymmetry between mercy (positively given) and judgement (justly administered). Twisse may have wished for sharper supralapsarian language; the English majority did not.
Parties
The drafting majority: preterition + just condemnation
Reprobation has two moments: the eternal decree to pass by the non-elect (preterition), and the just condemnation of the non-elect for their sin. The decree is sovereign; the condemnation is just.
- Edmund Calamy the Elder (1600–1666)
- Edward Reynolds (1599–1676)
- Anthony Tuckney (1599–1670)
- Stephen Marshall (c. 1594–1655)
Stricter supralapsarian inflection (minority)
Reprobation is a positive eternal decree to damnation, parallel in structure to election; the 'pass by' language is too mild and underplays the symmetry of the decree.
- William Twisse (1577–1646)
- Samuel Rutherford (c. 1600–1661)
Confessional language
WCF III.7: 'The rest of mankind God was pleased…to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice.'
Ontology placement
This crux bears on the following attribute of the Westminster ontology. The Westminster baseline value is marked WCF.
II · God & Decree · Reprobation
Legacy
The carefully balanced clause has been read both ways. Strict Reformed dogmatics (Hoeksema, Engelsma) have argued that the 'to ordain them to dishonor and wrath' clause grounds a positive decree of reprobation. Most Reformed divines — Hodge, Bavinck, Berkhof — have read it as preterition followed by just condemnation. The clause has been the basis of every Reformed discussion of double predestination since.