his familiar spirit takes himselfe to be spares not to professe that about the reconciling of Gods predestination with the liberty of mans will a poynt that comes so neere to this in hand as a poynt can doe there are many distinctions devised by the learned but yet he saith of them that they did not qutetare intellectum and therefore that he did captivare suum in obsequium fidei and Alvarez no dwarfe neither in Scholasticall that is rationall Divinity addeth that herein Cajetan piissimè doctissimè loquitur But who they are that have taken notice of those arguments here specified and at the sight of them were so ston'd as at the sight of some Medusas head and thereupon came to this course of incantation or pacification he doth very wisely conceale and like a man of authority puts it upon us to take it upon his word Yet I doe not remember that I have rested my selfe upon any such course though the holy Apostle thinks it sufficient to cleare any course of God from injustice by proving that Scripture doth attribute such a course unto God as I have shewed out of Rom. 9. 14. It is true the spirit which this Author breaths is the right Pelagian spirit according to the Pelagians in Bradwardines daies for their vaunt was that they could not be refuted by any reason Philosophicall but only by certain naked authorities Theologicall as I have heard of a Schollar sometimes challenged by a friend and kinsman of his for being given as he heard to the Arminian Tenet made a ready answer with protestation that that opinion was very plausible but that S t Paul was against it And therefore Bradwardine undertakes to confute them by reason Philosophicall so farre off was he from being cowed with their vain boasts and braggs His words are these Sicut antiqui Pelagiani ventoso nomine secularium scientiarum inflati consistorium Theologicum contemnentes Philosophicum flagitabant ita moderni Audivi namque quosdam advocatos Pelagii licet multum provectos in sacris apicibus affirmantes Pelagium nusquam potuisse convinci per naturalem Philosophicam rationem sed vix arguebatur utcunque per quasdam authoritates Theologicas maxime autem per authoritatem Ecclesiae quae Satrapis non placebat Quapr opter per rationes authoritates Philosophicas ipsos disposui reformare And for my part though I affect not in those poynts to goe beyond Scripture and Christian reason yet I am content to be led whethersoever my adversary thinks good to lead me And as a Schollar of my acquaintance being left handed and accordingly casting his cloake over the right shoulder was answered by a Cittizen observing it when he enquired his way saying when you shall come to such a place you must turne on your right hand meaning indeed on the left so likewise I am nothing afraid of this mans Philosophy nor his Abettors neither nothing doubting but as many as I find opposing this divine truth which we maintain their best dexterity in Philosophicall and rationall discourse will prove but a left handed Philosophy and in this very field of argumentation I purpose to lay upon him ere we part But let us first consider the things that he replies 1. He saith There is nothing in Scripture abhorring from sound and right reason he addes Odious too as if his Philosophy had taught him that it is the part of reason to hate and not rather of affections This rule when we were initiates in the University we were soon acquainted with Yet this Author to vent his fulnesse casts himselfe upon an unnecessary proofe thereof and the mischiefe is that his proofe maketh his cause worse then it was before For having formerly made the comparison between the word of God and sound and right reason in his reason he states the comparison between faith and reason nature and Scripture not distinguishing between nature corrupt and uncorrupt reason corrupt and uncorrupt Our service of God is reasonable in as much as it is performed by reasonable creatures and the rule thereof is not naturall reason but meerely the word of God In whom was naturall reason more eminent then in Philosophers Yet were they wont to be called Haereticorum Patriarchae and the Apostle hath professe of all such that the things of God seem foolishnesse unto them 1 Cor. 2. 14. Now I pray consider soberly how reasonable such courses are judged to be which are accounted foolishnesse and what a sweet harmony there is between things revealed and mens understandings and whether reasonable and foolish be not a plain contradiction as well as wise and foolish If we enjoy a more pure and refined reason then they let us give illumination Divine the glory of it and say with him in Job verily there is a spirit in man but the illumination of the Almighty giveth understanding And seeing the word of God is the only means of Divine illumination let us thank Gods word for all I come to the second Materiall of his reply 2. And that is this that all those Doctrine which are adâ—erse and repugnant to understandings purged from prejudice and false principles are not to be taken for Doctrines of Scripture but devices of men corrupting Scripture by false glosses and interpretations No marvaile that when men oppose the misteries of Godlinesse they fall upon the mysteries of iniquity Here we have a rule given to try whether a Doctrine proposed be to be taken for a Doctrine of Scripture yea or no And mark it well I beseech you and I desire that every sober man will mark it well and judge whether it deserve not to be numbred amongst the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the depths of Satan And withall judge whether the pretended Author of this discourse can in any probability be the Author of this and whether it becomes not rather some old beaten Souldier in Arminianisme that takes upon him to be the Master and Dictator of Sentences About Regula fidei the rule of Faith there is much question between us and Papists the meaning whereof is what that is whereinto must be made the last resolution of our Faith We say it is the word of God contained in the Books of the Old Testament and the New Papists say it is the voyce of the Church This Author deviseth a new way which I think was never heard off before except among the Socinians namely that it is the judgement of understandings purged from prejudice and false Principles For albeit the Doctrine of Faith we judge to be contained no where but in Gods word yet notwithstanding as touching the meaning of it nothing must be taken to be the true meaning of Scripture how fairely soever grounded thereupon in shew unlesse withall it seem nothing repugnant to understandings purged from prejudice and false principles Into this therefore must be made the last resolution of our faith Again where shall we meet with these judges as they are here
is well known that youth goeth before old age yet no man will say that the opinions of men in their youth are more likely to be sound then the opinions of riper age Neither doth any man call or account youth Antiquity Yet our Fathers we call our Ancients because they have gone before us but little reason there is in my judgement to count their faith the more sound by reason of such Antiquity no more then why the opinions of man in his youth should be reputed more sound then the opinions of his age For as there is a youth in man so there is to be acknowledged a youth of the world and so likewise of the Christian World even of the Church of God The Holy Ghost speaks in this language For even they who were the great Ancestors of the Jews in the daies of Jeremy are called the youth of Israell as the youth of Gods Church Jerem. 2. 2. I remember thee with the kindnesse of thy youth and the love of thy marriage when thou wentst after me in the wildernesse in a land that was not sowen Israel was as a thing hallowed unto the Lord c Ezech. 16. 60. I will remember my Covenant made with thee in the daies of thy youth In like sort the Ancients counting them immediately from the Apostles daies are the very youth of the Church Christian Now like as it is not to be exspected that a man should have as great perfection of knowledge in his youth as in his age so neither is it to be supposed that the Church of Christ should have as great perfection of knowledge in her youth as in her age This is to be understood caeteris paribus otherwise there lies a double exception against it the One in the way of Gods extraordinary mercy the Other in the way of Gods extraordinary judgement For God may extraordinarily inspire a young man with the spirit of Prophecy and so make him wiser then the aged Such was the condition of Gods exuberant grace in the daies of the Apostles enduing them with power from on high not only to instruct them with all spirituall wisdome and understanding in the mysteries of the Gospell but enabling them also to expresse it in diverse languages that so they might be able Ministers of Christ to carry the glad tidings of salvation over all the World On the other side the sinnes of the Christian world not embracing Gods Truth with love may deserve at the hands of God that he should give them over to illusions to believe lies Then no marvaile if our former light set in obscure darknesse and degenerate daies come in place of better and more noble times which may more easily come to passe considering that the light of the Gospell is a spirituall light of faith no naturall light of reason though even this naturall light of reason comes to be amended and perfected by that light of grace But it may be said that They who lived neer the Apostles daies are like to be better acquainted with the truth of God then wee I have found some to please themselves in this conceit and it runns smooth and glibb and it seems very plausible to winne approbation But as Austin saith of some things that acutule sonant but discussa reperiuntur obtusa so many times it falls out that reasons plausible at first when exploration comes prove very unsound like the fruit Solinus writes of which grew about Sodome Faire to the eye but being crushed in cineres abeunt vanam fuliginem And for the discovering of the emptinesse of this reason I proceed thus When you say of those Ancients that they were neer to the Apostles I demand whether the meaning be they were neer to the times of the Apostles or neer to the Persons of the Apostles or neer to the word of the Apostles The former two doe nothing at all conduce to the perfection of Christian knowledge or soundnesse of faith For certainly both Jews and Heathens professed enemies to the crosse of Christ were as neer to their Times and Persons as believing Christians but they were not so familiarly acquainted with their word But as touching familiar acquaintance with the word of the Apostles as also the embracing of it by faith Nothing I trust hindereth us from being as neer to the Apostles as the Ancients were Nay it is well known that as touching divers peeces of the books of the New Testament we receive them for Canonicall which many of the Ancients doubted of And as touching divers books concerning the times of the Old Testament they are discovered unto us to be Apocryphall which to many of the Ancients were not But it may be said that these Ancients to whom they pretend so much reverence which indeed is but reverence to themselves and to serve their own turnes were so neer to the Apostles that they not only were partakers of their writings but of their Preaching also by word of mouth To this I answer 1. That it is a very rare thing to meet with any such now adaies unlesse it be some counterfeit Author neither doe I find any such alleadged by any least of all by any Arminian who yet upon my knowledge doe discourse after this manner as touching their neernesse to the Apostles 2. But suppose there were any such and they should tell us what they heard preached by the Apostles shall we take their relations for Oracles and make the word of God to consist partly of that which is written by them and partly of that which is not written but delivered by word of mouth and commended unto us by tradition Then farewell the doctrine of Protestants concerning the rule of faith that it is only the written-word and let us with the Papists joyne thereunto traditions to make up a compleat Rule of Faith It may be farther said that by reason of their neernesse to the Apostles they may be better acquainted with the meaning of the word written To which I answer if so then either from the Apostles own mouthes or by relation from others Of any that report what they heard from the Apostles own mouths they alleadge none If they did what were this other then to bring in Tradition to be a Rule if not of faith yet of interpretation of Gods word which is as foule every way as the former considering that soundnesse of faith is grounded upon the soundnesse of interpretation of Gods word If only by relation from others the same exceptions lye against this and over and above this must be of somewhat farre lesse authority then the former it being so difficult a matter to report from another without adding somewhat of his own whether it be much or little as Chaucer speaketh Lastly let the Commentaries of these daies be compared with the Commentaries of the Ancients and let the indifferent reader judge which of them are most true most learned most substantiall So that I suppose I may be bold to
I have found in a Manuscript under his owne Hand This I grant was by the Canterburian Faction but withall I could tell strange Stories of the neglects that were heaped upon him by some who were I believe Zealous I am sure forward Sticklers for a Reformation These Men me think should blush at the ingenuous Testimony which Bishop Hall though dissenting from him about Church Goverment gave of his eminent worth in a Letter of his to M r W. S. by way of Approbation of a small piece of D r Twisses Entituled The doubting Conscience Resolved c. The Doctor ever declined conference by word of Mouth as out of modesty so because he thought the more deliberate way of the Pen to be quieter and fitter too for the bolting out of the Truth And hereupon he spake not much in the late Assembly of Divines at Westminster This some who talked their shares interpreted as an Argument of the former weaknesse or at least present decay of his intellectualls But as Sophocles when his Sonnes brought him into question for Dotage is reported to have recited a Tragedy of Oedipus Coloneus which he had last written and had in his Hands and to have demanded whether that seemed the Verse of a Dotard or no. So our Doctor could have stop'd the Mouths of these bold censurers by Publishing very Masculine and Vigorous pieces that he Penned in even his most declining Age. I may wish but I doe not expect to Live so long as to see any thing Published touching this Argument more convincing the adversary than this Elaborate and Weighty Discourse and yet some who are Perk'd up into places unto which their parts and gifts bare no proportion have very lately bespattered it as lame imperfect and I know not what But the best of it is this their detracting from it is not likely to be any disadvantage to it for it was so farre from working that mischievous effect which it seemes they intended as that it begat in those who heard it and unto whom it was afterwards reported only an admiration and a serious indignation at the immodest impudence of such raw young men who are no better skill'd in Polemicall Divinity then the mock Councel of the Great Duke of Muscovie are in State affaires which is made up of the gravest and seem liest men of all Musco and the adjoyning Citties richly apparrelled out of the Wardrope which to sorrainers not knowing this fraude appeare so many Princes and Noble men but indeed are meane and unqualified persons and of no more ability than so many pictures in a fairewrought hanging that serve only to cover a Wall But I appeale from the rash and unrighteous censures of these presumptuous Novices unto your more knowing and candid judgement who as you highly reverenced this our Author whilest living so have you ever since his death borne a zeale unto his memory and therefore I am assured that this Book of his will find with you not only a favourable but also a gratefull acceptation and the same confidence I have concerning all rationall Learned and Orthodoxe men unto whose reading I commend it and that unto the blessing of the Almighty and so I rest Your deeply Obliged And most Humbly devoted Nephew HENRY JEANES TO THE READER IN the days of our Henry the 8 th the whole Convocation offered unto S r Thomas Moore the sum of foure thousand pounds at the least thereby to recompence in part the paines and travailes he had taken in writing for the defence of the Romish faith which my Author miscalls the true Catholicke Faith Now the undertakings of S r Thomas Moore for the Popish cause are not worthy to be named the same day with the performances of Doctor Twisse against the enemies of God's grace both Jesuites and Arminians I was therefore I confesse transported with a just both sorrow and indignation when I could not prevaile with any though I solicited diverse to adventure upon the Printing of this following Worke of his without a large supply towards the the charge thereof a His Latine Workes have rendred him so renowned in forraine Churches as that they have looked upon him as the Bradwardine of the Age. The States of West-Friezland unto whom he was no otherwise known than by his Answer to Arminius his Book against Perkins offered him the greatest preferment that a Minister in that Country is capable of viz. the place of a Professor of Divinity in the University of Franeker and took order for defraying the charges of his journey and transportation of his family and were this Book that I now present unto thy view unto which there is not in the English Tongue any peere for solidity and accuratenesse in Scholasticall Divinity translated into Latine I am perswaded that Outlandish Divines would have such an estimate of it as S t Jerome had of certaine Bookes of the Martyr Lucian written with his own hand which he valued as a precious jewell or as Beza had of a Commentary of M r Rollocke upon the Romans and Ephesians concerning which he wrote unto a friend that he had gotten a treasure of incomparable value It was therefore very strange unto me that there should be any knowing and sober persons who should either despaire or doubt of the acceptation thereof But my wonder would have been swallowed up of a greater amazement if I had known that of which I was since by a good hand informed that this active unwearied and victorious Champion of Gods grace lived in great want even whilest he was Prolocutor of the late Assembly of Divines Nay which is stranger yet that he was slighted by some of his owne calling who if they had not much forgotten themselves would seeing they swam in all plenty have imitated in some degree at least that forementioned example of the gratefull munificence of a Popish Convocation unto S t Thomas Moore D r Ames in his Preface to the Diocesans Tryall of that Worthy Divine M r Paul Baine tells us that the said M r Baine was all his life after his silencing pressed with want not having as he often complained unto his Friends a place to rest his Head in which me thought saith D r Ames was an upbraiding of the Age and place where he lived with base Regardlesnesse of piety and learning If I should apply the like censure unto those that neglected this our Author the Glory of his Age and Ornament of his Nation I should not be over bitter He is now above any recompence to be made unto him in his owne Person by us but we may expresse a gratefull Memory of him as unto his Children so unto the Issue of his minde His Bookes I speake not only for the entertainment of those that are Extant but for bringing into the light those Pieces that lye in the Hands of his Children which are likely to be Buried in Dust and Perpetuall Oblivion If I had but halfe that Interest in great Personages which
diverse of my Brethren in both the Universities in the City of London have I should apply my selfe with an undeniable importunity to perswade them unto so good and great a Worke which will Purchase them a precious Memory with the Godly and Learned in all future Ages of the Church I have but one thing more to say of the Booke before I take my leave of Thee If any Arminian whatsoever will give a Just Full and Scholasticall Answer unto It I shall by God's helpe returne him a Reply For 't is De Causa Dei as Bradwardine Entitles his Booke And in defence of God's Cause I shall feare no Colours But if the Ignorant Paper-blurrers of the Time shall Snarle and Snap only at some few Passages they are not to expect that so much as any serious notice should be taken of them Thine In all the obligations of Charity and Truth HENRY JEANES THE FIRST BOOK IN TWO PARTS WHEREOF THE FIRST Containeth a Consideration of those Reasons for Which Mr HORD as he pretended First questioned the truth of Absolute Reprobation THE SECOND Examineth those Arguments against the Absolutenesse of Divine Reprobation which M. HORD took to be of a Convincing Nature OXFORD Printed by LEON LICHFIELD for THO ROBINSON Anno Salutis M. DC LIII A Table of the Principall Matters contained in this Treatise wherein the Answer unto Mr. Mason's Additions is referred in such order as that it is made aptly to cohere with the refutation of M. HORDS DISCOUERSE AN examination of the Epistle to the Reader lib. 2. p. 1 2 3 4 5. The maine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Question in these Controversies propounded and stated together with the different opinions of Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants both Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians concerning it examined lib. 1. pag. 1 2 3. c. usque ad p. 14 and p. 32 33. usque ad p. 40. l. 2. p. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. The absolute decree cleared from M r Hord's reasons both inducing and convincing 1. And first to begin with those for which as he pretended he first questioned the truth of absolute Reprobation where the absolute decree is vindicated from the charge 1. Of Novelty lib. 1. p. 40. c. usque ad p. 60. l. 2. p. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19. 2. Of Unwillingnesse to abide the tryall lib. 1. a p. 59. ad 84. l. 2. p. 19. 20. 21. 22. 3. Of Infamie lib. 1. a p. 83. ad p. 91. l. 2. p. 22. 23 24. 4. Of Affinity with the old and exploded errors of the Stoicks and Manichees lib. 1. p. 92 93. c. usque ad p. 102. 2. Those arguments against the absolutenes of Divine Reprobation according to both the upper and lower way which M r Hord tooke to be of a convincing nature are examined 1. M r Hord's or M r Mason's arguments against the upper or Supralapsarian way are answered lib. 2. p. 25. c. Where 1. The upper or Supralapsarian way is vindicated from the dishonouring of God in two particulars 1. It doth not charge him with mans destruction lib. 2. a p. 25. ad p. 51. 2. It doth not charge him with mens sinnes lib. 1. a p. 14. ad 28 l 2. a p. 51. ad 116. 2. The upper or Supralapsarian way is cleared from the overthrow of Religion and holy Life and that in foure particulars 1. It maketh not sinne to be no sinne lib 1. p. 10 28 29. l. 2. a p 110. ad 121. 2. It taketh not away the conscience of sinne lib. 1. p. 29 30 l. 2. p. 117 121 122. 3. It taketh not away the desert and guilt of sinne lib. 1. p. 10 30 31 32. l. 2. p 122 123 c. usque ad p. 131. 4. It maketh not the whole circle of mans Life a meere destiny lib. 2. p. 127 128 130 131 132 133. 2. Those pretended convictive arguments against absolute Reprobation which proceed as it is stated according to the Sublapsarian or lower way lib. 1. p. 103. c. And it is fully and clearly evinced that the Sublapsarian Doctrine is not repugnant unto 1. Testimonies of Scripture 2. Attributes of God 3. End of the Word and Sacrament with other excellent gifts of God to men 4. Holy and Pious endeavors 5. The Grounds of comfort whereby distressed consciences are to be relieved 1. The Sublapsarian Doctrine concerning absolute reprobation is not repugnant to Scripture lib. 1. p. 103 104. c. Particularly not to Ezek. 33. 11. As I live saith the Lord God I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked but that the wicked turne from his way live turne ye turne ye from your evill wayes for why will ye dye o House of Israel lib. 1. p. 103 c. Nor to Ezek. 18. 32. I have no pleasure in the death of him that dyeth saith the Lord God wherefore turne your selves and live ye lib. 1. p. 103 104 105 106. Not to Rom. 11. 32. For God hath concluded them all in unbeliefe that he might have mercy upon all lib. 1. p. 107 108. Not to Iohn 3. 16. God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son c. lib. 1. p. 108 109 110. Not to 1. Tim. 2. 4. Who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the Truth lib. p. 111 112 113 114 115. Not to 2 Peter 3. 9. not willing that any should perish but that all should come to Repentance lib. 1. p. 115 116 117. Not to those conditionall speeches which are in 1 Cron. 28. 9. And 2 Cron. 15. 2. And Gen. 4. 7. And Heb. 10. 38. lib. 1. p. 117 118 119 120. 2. The Sublapsarian Doctrine c. is not contrary unto Gods Attributes to the clearing of which a discourse premised concerning Gods Atributes in generall is refuted lib. 1. p. 121 122 c. unto p. 128. This done our Author comes to shew in speciall how that the Sublapsarian Doctrine doth not oppugne 1. God's Holinesse lib. 2. p. 133 134 c. unto p. 147. 2. God's Mercy lib. 1. p. 128 c. unto p. 145. l. 2. p. 147 148. 3. God's Justice lib. 1. a p. 145. ad 171. l. 2. a p. 149. ad 156. 4. God's truth or sincerity lib. 1. a p. 171. ad 187. l. 2. a p. 156. ad p. 167. 3. The Sublapsarian doctrine not contrary to the use and end of God's gifts to men lib. a p. 187. ad 222. l. 2. p. 166. 167. 4. The Sublapsarian Doctrine not prejudiciall to piety and a Godly life lib. 1. a p. 221. ad 255. l. 2. p. 167 168 169 170. 5. The Sublapsarian Doctrine no enemy to true comfort lib. 1. p. 255 256 c. usque ad finem By this Table Reader thou maist correct the mistitleing of pages as lib. 1. p. 86 87 88 89. 90. lib. 20. p. 22 23 24 25 26 27. p. 52 53 58 59. a p. 133 ad p. 147. READER I would advise thee
of them proceed on this manner The first thus Praedestinatio est voluntas Dei de illustrandâ suâ gloriâ per misericordiā justitiā At illa voluntas locum non habet in nondum condito ceu condendo The third thus Praedestinatio est pars providentiae administrantis gubernātis humanū genus ergò posterior naturâ actu creationis vel proposito creandi Si posterior actu creationis vel propositio creandi hominē jam homo praedestinationis objectum non est consideratus ut nondū conditus His 4 th argument is this Predestinatio est praeparatio supernaturalium bonorū ergo praecedit communicatio naturaliū proptereà creatio in naturâ sive actu sive in decreto Dei His last reason is of the same nature thus Illustratio sapientiae Dei per creationē prior est illustratione sapientiae Dei quae est administratio praedestinationis 1 Cor. 1. 21. Ergo creatio prior est praedestinatione To all which reasons of his I have answered in my Vindic. Grat. Dei lib. 1. part 1. De Praedestin digress 5. in severall chapters Only the second argument of Arminius insisteth upon Gods ordination of mans fall And to be freed from the trouble of answering this argument is the only thing that I know we gain by leaving the first and second way and embarking our selves in the third But how freed surely only so farre as that the doctrine of election and reprobation supposing Adams fall doth not engage us to inquire into divine providence concerning Adams fall But neverthelesse it cannot be denied but that had not God permitted Adam to fall he had never fallen And we that take the first way acknowledge no other Providence divine concerning the ingresse of sinne as sinne into the world but in the way of permission Sinne as sinne admitting no cause efficient but deficient only And it is utterly impossible that God either in doing what he doth or in forbearing to doe what he doth not should in any culpable or justly blameable manner be deficient And if it be farther demanded whether upon Gods permission it followeth that sinne shall be committed by the creature We readily professe it doth This Vorstius acknowledgeth a favorite of the Arminians Nay doth not Arminius himself deliver it expresly where he saith That when God permitteth the willing of ought Necesse est ut nullo argumentorum genere persuadeatur ad nolendum This he delivers without all qualification of the necessity mentioned which we doe not And this also Navarettus a Papist professeth and though he be a Dominican yet I know no Jesuite that opposeth him in this And if any man inferre herehence that then God determining to permit sinne did determine that sinne should enter into the World We willingly grant that God did so ordaine namely that sinne should come to passe by his permission Non aliquid fit saith Austin nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo And Bellarmine professeth that Bonum est mala fieri Deo permittente so that herein God doth not will evill but that which is good in the acknowledgement of Bellarmine and that in the heat of his opposition against our Divines in this particular And Arminius is expresse in saying Voluit Deus Achabum mensuram scelerum implere And what is this but Peccata peccatis cumulare And though the Jesuits and Arminians doe with all their force resist yet it evidently followes from the notion of efficacious grace embraced by the one and by the notion of an efficacious impediment of sinne dictated by Arminius himselfe For efficacious grace with the Jesuites consists in the congruity thereof and the congruity thereof consists in this that God foreseeth that upon the confession thereof sinne will be avoided Now what is the reason why God grants such a grace whereupon he seeth sin will not be avoided and denies such a grace upon the granting whereof he knowes full well that sinne would be avoided but because his pleasure is that sinne shall be committed by his permission and not be avoyded although he hath given them grace sufficient to avoid it as they say and it was most true of Adam in the state of innocency In like sort doth Arminius distinguish of Peceati impedimentum sufficiens efficax Efficacious hinderance of sinne is that whereby God seeth sinne will be avoided sufficient is only that whereby a man may avoid it if he will But withall he confesseth that God in the Promptuary of his wisdome hath not only such impediments as are sufficient to the avoiding of any sinne but such also as whereby any sinne would indeed be avoided were he pleased to grant them But yet as often as he thinks good to permit sinne he doth not grant such impediments And is not this a manifest evidence that it is Gods will that sinne shall come to passe to wit as often as it doth come to passe by his permission But suppose all our Divines that embrace the third way doe imagine the absurdities here spoken of to be justly chargeable upon the first way Yet as he thinks them in an errour while they conceive they can with ease avoid these absurdities by their third way let him be pleased to conceive they may as well be in an errour in thinking them justly chargeable upon the first way and consequently their opinion is nothing sufficient to justify that they are unremoveable by them that embrace the first way It is true there is no cause of breach either of Unity or Amity between our Divines upon this difference as I shewed in my digressions De Praedestinatione Digress 1. seeing neither of them derogate either from the prerogative of Gods grace or of his soveraignty over his creatures to give grace to whom he will and to deny it to whom he will and consequently to make whom he will vessels of mercy and whom he will vessells of wrath but equally they stand for the divine prerogative in each And as for the ordering of Gods decrees of creation permission of the fall of Adam giving grace of faith and repentance unto some and denying it to others and finally saving some and damning others whereupon only arise the different opinions as touching the object of predestination and reprobation it is meerly Apex Logicus a poynt of Logick And were it not a meer madnesse to make a breach of unity or charity in the Church of God meerely upon a poynt of Logick Thus have I justified the improbability and utter unlikelihood that ever any schisme will be made in the Church of God upon these nice and meer Logicall differences in my Vindic. Grat. Dei which this Author is acquainted with as appears by a passage that hereafter he representeth therehence and that farther into the Book then these my digressions are upon the point of predestination but is content to take no notice thereof least it might hinder the course
and that after the same way For sometimes the Doctor pleads for a revocable condition of the divine decrees For the Pope never bindes his hands by any Grant he makes and why should God bind his hands by any decree he makes especially considering that God hath more wisdome and goodnesse to manage such authority then the Pope But if it be dishonesty for a man to take liberty to break his promises I pray what goodnesse is required to the managing thereof Yet that Doctor keeps his course in discoursing of an impotent immutability and saith it is indecent to attribute any such immutability unto God whereas immutability is a notion which connotates no power of doing at all but only a power of suffering and formally denotes the negation thereof And what madnesse is it to say that the lesse power God hath of receiving change the lesse power he hath of working Yet this is not all He hath another device answerable to the latter course of this Author and that is that Nothing concerning any mans salvation or damnation is determined by God before he is borne or before his death and to that purpose he saith that God is still decreeing as if hitherto he had not decreed ought And would you know of whom he learned this Rogers in his exposition of the Articles of the Church of England a Book dedicated to Arch-Bishop Bancroft allowed by the lawfull authority of the Church of England writing upon the 17 th Article and delivering his second proposition collected therehence in this forme Predestination hath been from everlasting when he comes to set forth the Adversaries of this truth Those wrangling Sophisters saith he are deceived who because God is not included within the compasse of any time but hath all things to come as present before his eyes doe say that God he did not in the time long agoe past only but still in the time present likewise doth Predestinate 2. Consider we the reason he gives for so shamefull an assertion as touching the alterable condition of Gods decrees or as touching the ends of men as yet undetermined by God In vaine saith he is freedome in the actions if the end which they drive at be determined Here First we have a wild phrase Freedome in actions For by freedome we understand an active power of working after a certain manner which power is found in the will not in the actions Secondly a bare avouching that unlesse God as yet hath left the ends of men living undetermined or in case he hath determined them unlesse these determinations of his be alterable Freedome of Will is given in vaine as much as to say unlesse we admit of such monstrous assertions the freedome of mans Will is in vaine But we say this consequence is most untrue and we give our reason for it For whether salvation or damnation be the ends he meaneth no creature is capable of either but only creatures rationall and the one being bestowed by way of reward and the other inflicted by way of punishment each of these presupposeth freedome of Will in the parties thus proceeded with Or whether the ends are the manifestation of Gods vindicative and remunerative justice for the same reason now specified each of these doth necessarily bespeak freedome of Will in them who after either way are made uselesse on whom the glory of God is to be manifested When he addes saying Omnis actio is propter sinem This altogether concernes the ends intended and proposed by the author of the action nothing concernes the ends proposed by another And the ends of a man proposed by himselfe are either supreame or intermediate still every action deliberate for so alone it holds tends to one end or other which man himselfe intends The supream end of every one is his chief good but as touching that wherein this consists all doe not agree Some place it in wealth some in pleasure some in honour some in virtuous life By the light of Grace we are taught that as we are creatures our end which we should propose unto our selves is the glorifying of God our Creator though there were neither reward nor punishment But if there be a glorious reward to be gotten by it and a dreadfull punishment to be suffered of them that seek the satisfying of their own lusts and not the glory of God this is a double hedge unto us to keep us in the good waies of the Lord and to move us to make strait stepps unto him but surely the end of the creature still is the glorifying or God that made him God makes it his care to provide for us let our care be to glorify him for seeing all things are from him therefore all things must be for him and seeing we are reasonable creatures and know this we must goe on in conforming our selves hereunto and seeking his glory And albeit this Author may conceive that salvation is the end he aimes at yet can I not beleeve that he makes damnation the end that any man drives at Nothing being fit to be a mans end but that which hath rationem Boni which surely damnation hath not 3. His Annotations as touching the three Opinions proposed by him come to be considered in the next place and these are two 1. The Substance and Formality of them which as he saith is an unavoidablenesse of mens actions and ends whatsoever they be And in this he saith all of them agree all holding that in all things undeclinable Fates and insuperable necessity doe domincere Whereunto I answer that this is contradictory to his own premises as touching the third Opinion For against the Maintainers of Gods absolute decree he did formerly object only disjunctively that either all mens actions were absolutely necessary that is unavoidable or at least that mens ends were unavoidable which is to inferre that but one of them is avoidable but here he professeth as upon that which he had formerly delivered that by the Third Opinion both mens actions and their ends were unavoidable And as for the second Opinion of the Manichees I find no mention of the unavoidable condition either of mans actions or ends at all in the Relation thereof by those who have most studied their History And as for the Stoicks I no where find that they denied the liberty of mens will or that it was in mans power either to forbeare the doing of that he doth or to doe the things he forbears to doe but rather the contrary that they made choyce some of them at least though Austin delivers it without any such distinction to exempt the wills of men from subjection unto Fate though I deny not but that many vain discourses might be differently entertained by them having no better light to guide them then the light of nature and wanting that which God hath in great mercy vouchsafed unto us the light of grace and that in very plentifull manner Much lesse doe I find by them that any
speaks of the necessity of it unto salvation or that many thousands are now adaies regenerated without any Sacrament of regeneration That the Spirit of God is the efficient cause of Regeneration I think no Christian doubteth but this Author maketh the Baptizing with Water to be an efficient also as when he saith Baptisme is appoynted to be a means of Regeneration to all that are Baptized and not only so but that it doth effect it also in all that doe not put an obstacle in the way to hinder it I acknowledge willingly that Baptisme materiall is an instrument to wit both as a signe as a seale But that it is an instrument in any other kind of operation than belongs to a signe and seale I have not hitherto learned out of the word of God And as I remember Arminius was sometimes challenged for Heterodoxy about the Sacraments and withall that his Apology was this he never ascribed any other efficacy unto the Sacraments than is denoted under the tearmes of Signes and Seales but no marvaile if a degenerated condition hath seized on any that such proficiunt in pejus and grow more and more degenerate The phrase used here in calling Baptisme a means of regeneration sounds harsh in my eares we commonly say and it is the doctrine of our Catechisme that a Sacrament is an outward and visible signe of an inward and invisible grace now this grace in Baptisme I take to be the grace of regeneration and is it a decent expression to say that the signe of Regeneration is the means of Regeneration As for Baptismus spiritus the Baptisme of the spirit that is the very working of regeneration but Baptismus fluminis the Baptisme of water that is the administration of the outward signe and seale of the grace of regeneration The word Preacheth forgivenesse of sinnes to all that believe so doth the Sacrament of Baptisme but the word Preacheth this to the eare the Sacrament to the eye The word assureth it for it is Gods word the Sacrament assures it for it is Gods seale but neither of these worketh the assurance without the spirit of God and as for the working of Faith it selfe I have read that Faith comes by hearing I no where read that Faith comes by the being Baptized And sure I am when men of ripe yeares came to be Baptized they were first Catechumini then competentes and none admitted unto Baptisme unlesse the word had formerly brought them unto faith The Apostle calls Baptisme the laver of regeneration by the Rhemists translation the fountain of regeneration by the former English translation the washing of regeneration by the last but whereas this Author dignifies it with this title because it doth effect regeneration in all that doe not put an obstacle in the way to hinder it if this Author shall prove it while his head is hot we shall give that credence to it as it deserves in the mean time it stands for a bold affirmation let him take his time to make it appeare to be sound the Rhemists upon the place have this note As before in the Sacrament of holy Orders 1 Tim. 4. 2 Tim. 1. So here it is plaine that Baptisme giveth grace and that by it as by an instrumentall cause we be saved Master Fulkes answer is this Here is no word to prove that Baptisme giveth grace of the worke wrought but the Apostle saith that God hath saved us by the renewing of the Holy Ghost which is testified by the Sacrament of Baptisme marke I pray the office of Baptisme in Master Fulkes judgement to testify the renewing which is Sacramentally the laver of regeneration not by the worke wrought but by the grace of Gods spirit by which we are justified So speaketh Saint Peter and explicateth himselfe 1 Pet. 3. 21. Baptisme saveth us not the washing of the flesh of the body but the interrogation of a good conscience And because I know no obstacle that an Infant can put to hinder the effect of it for I suppose the obstacle must be rationall and Infants are not come to the use of reason to performe any rationall act which may prove any rationall obstacle therefore it seems this Authors opinion is that all who are Baptized in the Church are regenerate this indeed was the profession of Master Mountague before he was Bishop and was answered by Bishop Carelton as touching the best firmament of his opinion the Book of our Common-Prayer where the Child Baptized is said to be regenerate that is to be understood Sacramento tenus which is Saint Austins phrase and which he distinguisheth from truly regenerate And Bishop Usher in his History of Gotteschaleus alleadgeth out of the Author of the imperfect work upon Mathew Hom. 5. this sentence Eos qui cum tentati fuerint superantur pereunt videri quidem filios Dei factos propter aquam Baptismatis revera tamen non esse filios Dei quia non sunt in Spiritu Baptizati As also out of Austin De Unitate Ecclesiae cap. 19. Visibilem Baptismum posse habere alienos qui regnum Dei non possidebunt sed esse donum Spiritus Sancti quod proprium eorum est tantum qui regnabunt cum Christo in aeternum And lastly out of the same Austin as he is alleadged by Peter Lombard l. 4. Sent. dis 4. Sacramenta in solis electis efficere quod figurant All this is to be found in that Book of Bishop Usher p. 188. Besides many more pregnant passages are collected by him for the same purpose And not to charge him with authority only but with some reason when Saint James saith Jam. 1. 18. Of his own will he hath begotten us by the word of truth what I pray is here meant by the word of truth Is it not the Gospell to wit The Preaching of Christ crucified Now consider to whom doth he write but to the twelve Tribes that is to the Christian Jewes such as were begotten to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ as Saint Peter speakes writing also to the Jewes If then these Jewes were regenerated by the Preaching of the Gospell surely they were not regenerated by Circumcision and if regeneration were not necessarily annexed to the Sacrament of Circumcision amongst the Jewes then neither is it necessarily affixed to the Sacrament of Baptisme amongst the Christians For our Divines doe usually maintaine against the Papists that the Sacraments of the Old Testament were as effectuall to the Jewes as the Sacraments of the New Testament are effectuall unto us Christians It is true Baptisme is ordained that those which doe receive it may have the remission of their sinnes but not absolutely but conditionally to wit in case they believe and repent as appears both in that place Acts 2. 38. and Rom. 4. 11. And Baptisme as a Seale doth assure hereof only in case they believe and repent and therefore none of ripe years were admitted unto Baptisme untill
his trust in himself with Gods concurrence as if otherwise a mans condition were uncomfortable and the way were open to desperation But what doth Austin answer to such like discourses of old de Predest sanct cap 22. An vero timendum est ne nunc de se homo desperet quando spes ejus demonstratur ponenda in Deo non autem desperaret si eam in se ipso superbissimus infelicissimus poneret Is it to be feared least a man despaire when it is proved that a mans hope is to be placed in God and that he is free from despaire in case he place his hope in himselfe most proudly and most unhappily As for that which he cites out of Melancthon it is every way as much to the purpose as that which he cited out of Calvin in the first Section Melancthon sayeth we must judge of Gods will by his Word so saith Calvin his words are these Qui recte atque ordine electionem investigant qualiter in verbo continetur eximium inde referunt consolationis fructum To enquire after a mans election in the Word is the way to reape singular consolation But they that enquire after the eternall counsell of God without the Word in exitialem abyssum se ingurgitant they plung themselves into a gulfe of perdition Yet when Melancthon sayeth multa disput antur durius the comparative there is not to be rendred as this Authour renders it more harshly but rather thus somwhat harshly And of Melancthons concurrence with Calvin in the doctrine of predestination as touching the substance of the doctrine I have formerly shewed out of his owne Epistle who professeth that he differeth only tradendi ratione in the manner of delivering it and of his owne professeth that they are of a popular nature thus Mea sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adusum accommodata as it were woven with a thicker thred and fited to use and practise No man doubts but that as Melanchton saith it is Gods immutable commandement to heare the Son and to assent to the promise and the promise is universall to wit that whosoever believeth shall be saved Therefore let us not seeke election besides the Word it is a grave counsell and well becomming Melancthon and Calvin gives the very same councell in the very Booke Chapter and Section last related by this Author But he saw it fitter for his turne to represent Melancthon professing as much rather then Calvin We nothing doubt but God will performe that he hath promised and therefore whosoever believeth shall be saved according to our doctrine not so according to the doctrine of Arminians who maintaine that a man may totally and finally fall away from faith Rogers upon the Articles of the Church of England Art 17. Not only acknowledgeth this universality of Gods promises according to the Tenor of that Article but concludeth herehence That they are not to be heard that say that the number of the elect is but small and seeing we are uncertaine whether we be of that company or no we will proceed in our course as we have begunne and accompts all such adversaries of this truth touching the universality of Gods promises and let every sober man judge whether this Author doth not justify this their discourse whom he accompts adversaries to the truth of that Article in that particular The same Rogers in his 8 proposition as touching the comfortable nature of predestination writs thus This doctrine of predestination is to the Godly ful sweet pleasant and comfortable because it greatly confirmeth their faith in Christ and encreaseth their love towards God But saith he to the wicked and reprobate the consideration hereof is very sower unsavory and most uncomfortable as that which they think though very untruly and sinfully causeth them either to despaire of his mercy being without faith or not to feare his justice being extreamely wicked whereas neither from the Word of God nor any confession of the Church can man gather that he is a vessell of wrath prepared to damnation What more contradictions to this Authors discourse of the uncomfortable condition of predestination according to our way yet who was this Authour was he at any time accompted an innovatour in this Church His books dedicated to Arch-Bishop Bancroft writing upon the Articles of the Church of England perused and by the lawfull authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick And because some choosing to play at small game rather then sit out may say that he speakes not a word of absolute election or absolute reprobation let his 5. Proposition be observed which is this Of the meere pleasure of God some men in Christ Jesus are elected and not others unto salvation this he prooves by that Rom. 9. 11. That the purpose of God might remaine according to election And that Eph. 1. 5. Who doth predestinate us according to the good pleasure of his will And that 2 Tim. 1. 9. Not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose and grace And that Exod. 33. 19. And Rom. 9. 15. I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy And as touching the other part of not choosing others that of Solomon Prov. 16. 4. The Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea even the wicked against the day of evill And Rom. 9. 21. Hath not the Potter power over the clay to make of the same lumpe one vessell unto honour and an other unto dishonour And comming unto the Errours and adversaries of this truth Hereby saith he is discovered the impiety of those men which think that 1. Man doth make himselfe elegible for the Kingdome of Heaven by his owne good workes and merits so teach the Papists 2. God beheld in every man whether he would use his grace well and believe the Gospell or no and as he saw man so he did predestinate choose or refuse him 3. Besides his will there was some other cause in God why he chose one man and cast off another but this cause is hidden from us 4. God is partiall and unjust for choosing some and refusing others calling many and electing but few The other place alleadged by this Author of Melancthon partly repeates the same matter concerning the universality of the promises no mention at all with him either of the universality of Gods love or of the universality of Christs death or of the universality of the Covenant of grace partly opposeth it to dangerous imaginations of predestination what are these but such as proceed without the word For without doubt it is to be understood in opposition to that which he formerly delivered advising us to judge of the will of God by his expresse Word and all one with seeking election extra verbum formerly specified of both which Calvin speakes more at large in that very place aleadged by this Author in the first Section of this last sort of Arguments And there Calvin commends the one as a
shewing the like grace to them which he shewed to others 1. So that the moving cause of Reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall and actuall like as on the other side the moving cause of election is only the will of God or not faith or any good workes whereupon this Authour is loath to manifest his opinion This doctrine is not only approved by Doctour Whitaker Doctour of the Chaire in the Universitie of Cambridge and that in his Cygnea Cantio a little before his death but justified and confirmed by varietie of Testimonies both of Schoolemen as Lumbard Aquinas Bannes Petrus de Alliaco Gregorius Arminensis of our owne Church and the Divines thereof as taught by Bucer at Cambridge by Peter Martyr at Oxon professed by the Bishops and others promoted by Queen Elizabeth and farther in the yeare of our Lord 1592 there was a famous recantation made in the Universitie of Cambridge by one Barret in the 37. of Elizabeth whereunto he was urged by the heads of houses of that Universitie The Recantation runnes thus Preaching in Latine not long since in the Universitie Church Right worshipfull many things slipt from me both falsly and rashsly spoken whereby I understand the mindes of many have been grieved to the end therefore I may satifie the Church the truth which I have publiquely hurt I doe make this publique confession both Repenting and Revoking my Errour First I said that no man in this transiâ—â—ie world is so strongly underpropt at least by the certainty of Faith that is unlesse as I afterwards expounded it by Revelation that he ought to be assured of his owne Salvation But now I protest before God and acknowledge in my conscience that they which are justified by faith have peace towards God that is have reconciliation with God and doe stand in that grace by faith therefore that they ought to be certaine and assured of their owne Salvation even by the certainty of Faith it selfe 2. Secondly I affirmed that the faith of Peter could not faile but that other mens faith may for as I then said Our Lord prayed not for the faith of every particular man but now being of a better and more sound Iudgment according to that which Christ teacheth in plaine words Ioh. 17. 20. I pray not for these alone that is the Apostles but for them also which shall believe in mee through their word I acknowledge that Christ prayed for the faith of every particular believer and that by the vertue of that prayer of Christ every true believer is so stayd up that his faith cannot faile 3. Thirdly touching perseverance to to the end I said that that certainty concerning the time to come is proud for as much as it is in his owne nature contingent of what kind the perseverance of every man is neither did I affirme it to be proud only but to be most wicked but now I freely protest that the true and justifiing faith whereby the faithfull are most neare united unto Christ is so firme as also for the time to come so certaine that it can never be rooted up out of the mindes of the faithfull by any temptation of the flesh the world or divell himselfe so that he that once hath this faith shall ever have it for by the benefit of that justifying faith Christ dwelleth in us and we in Christ therefore it cannot but be both increased Christ growing in us dayly as also persevere unto the end because God doth give constancy 4. Fourthly I affirmed that there was no distinction in faith but in the Persons believing in which I confesse I did erre Now I freely acknowledge the Temporarie faith which as Bernard witnesseth is therefore fained because it is temporary it is distinguished and differeth from the saving faith whereby sinners apprehending Christ are justified before God for ever not in measure and degrees but in the very thing it selfe Moreover I adde that Saint Iames doth make mention of a dead faith and Paul of a faith that worketh by love 5 Fifthly I added that forgivenesse of sinnes is an Article of faith but not particular neither belonging to this man or that man that is as I expounded it that no true faithfull man either can or ought certainely believe that his sinnes are forgiven But now I am of an other mind and doe freely confesse that every true faithfull man is bound by this Article of faith to believe the forgivenes of sinnes and certainely to believe that his owne particular sinnes are freely forgiven him neither doth it follow hereupon that that Petition of the Lord's prayer to wit forgive us our trespasses is needlesse for in that Petition we aske not only the gift but also the increase of Faith 6 Sixtly these words escaped me in my Sermon viz As for those that are not saved I doe most strongly believe and doe freely protest that I am so perswaded against Calvin Peter Martyr and the rest that sinne is the true and proper cause of Reprobation But now being better instructed I say that the Reprobation of the wicked is from everlasting and that saying of Saint Austine to Simplician to be mòst true viz If sinne were the cause of Reprobation then no man should be elected because God doth know all men to be defiled with it And that I may speak freely I am of the same mind and doe believe concerning the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation as the Church of England believeth and teacheth in the booke of the Articles of faith in the Article of Praedestination Last of all I uttered these words rashly against Calvin a man that hath very well deserved of the Church of God to wit that he durst presume to lift up himselfe above the high and Almighty God by which words I doe confesse that I have done great injurie to that most learned and right good man and I most humbly beseech you all to pardon this my rashnes as also in that I have uttered many bitter words against Peter Martyr Beza Zanchy Iunius and the rest of the same religion being the lights and ornaments of our Church calling them by the odious names of Calvinâ—sts and other slanderous termes branding them with a most grevious marke of reproach whom because our Church doth worthily reverence it was not meet that I should take away their good name from them Doctor Fulke in like manner maintaines that reprobation is not of workes but of God's free will Rom 9 Num 2. His words are these God's election Reprobation is most free of his owne will not upon the foresight of the merits of either of them for he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth vers 18. Yet here is to be distinguished for the explication of the truth That God's decree of Reprobation may be considered either as touching the Act of God reprobating and willing or as touching the things hereby willed or Decreed As
quippe servitus non institutio est Dei sed judicium This slavery of man to Satan is not God's institution but judgment that is God brought it upon him not of his mere pleasure but in the way of judgment Like as Austin in like manner acknowledgeth concupiscense to be not sinne only but the punishment of sinne also So Remigius and the Chuch of Lyons say that God imposed it not on Adam but man falling from God brought a necessitie of sinning upon him upon all his race God hereupon justly withdrawing his holy Spirit from him 2. Why he should alleadge the first passage under the name of the Church of Lyons I know not The reverend Bishop acknowledgeth Florus to be the Authour thereof a Deacon of Lyons pag. 126. Although the same Reverend Bishop acknowledgeth that other book also that goes under the name of the Church of Lyons now extant in the Bibliothecâ Sanctorum Patrum and wherehence Vossius communicateth unto us his excerpta was written by the same Florus pag. 115. He had more reason to father his next passage which he produceth out of Remigius upon the Church of Lyons For albeit Maldonat cites the booke intituled Liber de tribus Episcoporum epistolis whence this passage is taken under the name of Remigius yet he who set it forth ascribes it to the Church of Lyons and that by the direction of the Copy which was in the hands of Nicholas Faber as appeares Goteschalc hist 170. But none doe I find to ascribe this worke of Florus to the Church of Lyons though the Authour of another booke under that title the Bishop acknowledgeth to be Florus 3. Florus acknowledgeth that the very Saints of God are under a necessity of sin in a sort p. 149. In Sanctis licet sit liberum arbitrium jam Christi gratiâ liberatum atque Sanctum tamen tanta est illa sanitas ut quamdiu mortaliter vivunt sine peccato esse non possint cum velint atque desiderent non peccare non possūt tamen non peccare In the Saints of God though there be freedome of will as freed by the grace of Christ and made holy yet this health is such that as long as they carry this mortall body about thē they cannot be without sin and though they would and desire to be without sin yet they cannot be without sin This I conceive is spoken in respect of the flesh lusting against the Spirit of the law in our members rebelling against the law of our mind leading us captive to the law of sin How much more are the wicked in bondage to sinne and Satan as the same Florus sheweth pag. 142 For whereas Scotus taught that a man had not lost his liberty but only the power and vigour of his liberty Florus opposeth him thus Non rectè dicit quia nec sentit he saith not well because he thinks not well sed sicut vigorem potestatem libertatis ita ipsam perdidit libertatem ut jam ipse ad verum bonum unde cecidit liber esse non possit As he hath lost the vigour and power of his libertie so he hath lost libertie it selfe insomuch that unto true good from whence he is fallen he cannot be free to wit untill he be freed by the grace of Christ In like māner Remigius discourseth also grāting free will only to evill p. 36. In infidelibus id ipsum liberū arbitriū ita per Adam damnatum perditum in operibus mortuis liberum esse potest in vivis non potest In infidells free will it selfe so damned and lost in Adam may be free in dead workes cannot be free in living works that is is not free to produce works belonging to a spirituall life So that they unanimously confesse that in respect of originall sin there is a necessity of sinning but this is rightly to be understood namely thus that true good they cannot doe so that whatsoever they doe is evill only that it is free unto them to doe this or that evill which is most true Secondly thus farre they qualifie this necessitie of sinning that never any man is carried by the Divine providence so as to sinne whether they will or no. For albeit Rabanus charged them whom he opposed herewith pag. 53. Si enim secundum ipsos qui talia sentiunt Dei praedestinatio invitum hominem facit peccare quomodo Deus justo judicio damnat peccantem cum ille non voluntate sed necessitate peccaverit For if according to them who thinke such things God's predestination makes a man to sinne against his will how doth God in his just judgmēt damne him that sinneth when he sinned not voluntarily but necessarily Thus they criminated their adversaries but Remigius answers on their behalfe who were thus falsly accused Nemo ita sentit aut dicit quod Dei predestinatio aliquem invitum faciat peccare ut jam non propriae voluntatis perversitate sed divinae praedestinationis necessitate peccare videatur No man so thinks or speakes that God's predestination makes a man to sinne against his will so that a man should seeme to sinne not by the perversitie of his own will but by the necessitie of divine predestination But this is the worke of Divine predestination that he who sins willingly perseveres willingly in his sins shall against his will be punished And the truth is taking predestination as it signifies preparation of Grace or God's decree to conferre this rather God 's not predestinating a man or not giving grace and not making him to be of God is the cause why a man sinneth according to that of our Saviour He that is of God heareth God's words ye therefore heare them not because ye are not of God Yet this is rightly to be understood for God's not conferring regenerating grace is rather the cause why their naturall corruption is not cured thē that they goe on in their sinfull courses for naturally carnall men are prone enough to sin and in this course they necessarily continue untill God changeth their hearts necessarily I say but not against their wills For sinne is as a sweet morsell which they roule under their tongue This may suffice for answer unto these passages and withall to represent the vanitie of this Authour's discourse endeavouring to brand our doctrine with making God the Authour of sinne more of this hereafter For I am acquainted with that which he here conceales and with certaine adjuncts thereunto both touching the opinion of the Church of Lyons concerning falling from grace as also this Authours bold adventure in two particulars in justifying Vossius citing the cōfession of Pelagius as one of Austin's sermons as also defending him in the point of the predestinarian heresie which Doctor Usher maintaines to be a mere fiction of the Semipelagians to bring Austin's doctrin thereby into disgrace But Vossius conceives that there was indeed such an heresie and that the Monks
saved as Prosper doth without assaying to cleare it by interpretation as Austin doth and will have it goe for a secret and withall he expresly concurres with Prosper in expressing first that God doth not give grace for mens good workes sake nor denyes it for their evill workes For the ages wherein God so plentifully communicated his grace were no better then the former Observe farther that Austin himselfe in his Enchiridion treating of this place of Paul God will have all to be saved after he hath given two interpretations thereof the last whereof interpreting it of genera singulorum not singula generum is most generally received as most congruous both to Scripture phrase in generall and in speciall unto this very text of Paul as Piscator observes and Vossius against himselfe improvidently confesseth Yet see the ingenuity of this great light in Gods Church If any man can give any other convenient interpretation let him provided we be not driven to deny the first article of Creed whereby we confesse that God is omnipotent And this I conceive proceeded out of a desire to hold up the meaning of that text to the uttermost that the very letter of it may be applyed so we might not be driwen to so foule an inconvenience as to say that God willeth that mans salvation which is never saved which is as much as to say that such a one therefore is not saved because God cannot save him Observe farther in the dayes of Hincmarus and Remigius these controversies being revived in the cause of Goteschalk the church of Lyons writes a booke wherein it treats of the meaning of this place of Paul whereof he gives fower expositions according to the antient fathers First That it is to be understood of genera singulorum not singula generum of all sorts of men not of all men of all sorts Secondly That none is saved but by the will of God Thirdly That God workes in us a will or a desire that all may be saved Fourthly That God will have all men to be saved if they will Then they propose their judgement concerning these fower expositions distinguishing betweene the three first and the last thus In the three first expositions of these words wherein it is sayd that God willeth all men to be saved no absurdity is to be found no repugnancy unto faith But as touching the fourth and the last here we are to take heed for it gives occasion to the Pelegian pravity in as much as it affirmes that God that he may save men doth exspect the wills of men Now this Pelagian pravity is the very substance of our Authours orthodoxy whom I deale with Against this errour sayth the Church of Lyons we read Definitions have beene made in the antient counsels of the fathers This I take out of the extracts which Vossius hath made out of that booke which goes under the name of the Church of Lyons in his Pelagian history l. 7. c. 4. p. 755 756. there is an addition of some few lines in the third Sect concerning Gods justice but they adde noe moment at all to the rest and therefore the answer made in that third Sect to M. Hord may suffice And in the same sect and subsection subordinate to the second assertion which he obtrudes upon the maintainers of the lower way which was this God hath determined for the sinne of Adam to cast away the greatest part of mankind for ever this Interpolation is inserted This is so cleare a case that Calvin with some others have not stickt to say that God may with as much justice determine men to hell the first way as the latter See Instit l. 3. cap. 23. s 7. Where against those who deny that Adam fell by Gods decree he reasoneth thus All men are made guilty of Adams sinne by Gods absolute decree alone Adam therefore sinned by this only decree What lets them it grāt that of one man which they must grant of all men And a little after he saith It is too absurd that these kind patrons of Gods justice should thus stumble at a straw and leap over a blocke God may with as much justice decree Adams sinne and mens damnation out of his only will and pleasure as out of that will and pleasure the involving of men in the guilt of the first sinne at and their damnation for it That is the substance of his reasoning To the same purpose speaketh Maccovius Fromhence we may see sayth he what to judge of that opinion of our adversaryes viz. That God cannot justly ordaine men to destruction without he consideration of sinne Let them tell me which is greater to impute to one man the sinne of another and punish him for it with eternall death or to ordaine simply without looking at sinne to destruction Surely no man will deny the first of these to be greater But this God may do without any wrong to iustice much more therefore may he do the other As touching the assertion it selfe here charged upon our Divines namely that God hath determined for the sinne of Adame to cast away the greatest part of mankind I have thereunto answered at large in my consideration of M. Hords discourse Yet let me adde something by way of an apt accommodation of that before delivered to cleare the ambiguous phrase of this Authour as touching the phrase of casting away For it may well be doubted whether by casting away which he makes the Object of Gods determination he meanes the act of damnation or the act of denying grace If the act of damnation it is most untrue For Reprobates are not damned for originall sinne only but for all the actuall sinnes that have beene committed by them And as they are and shall be damned for them So God from everlasting decreed they should be damned for them Secondly According to my Tenet in noe moment of nature is Gods decree of damning reprobates before the prescience not of originall sinne only but also of all their actuall sinnes Indeed I do not make the prescience of sinne to go before the decree of damnation Nor do I make the decree of damnation to go before the prescience of sinne but I conceive them to be simultaneous It is true many infants we say perish in originall sinne only not living to be guilty of any actuall sinne of their persons why should this seeme strange when M. Hord himselfe professeth in his preface sect 4. That all mankind are involved in the guilt of eternall death If all are guilty of eternall death then it were just with God to inflict eternall death upon all for originall sinne How much more is it just to inflict eternall death upon some few being guilty of it Therefore observe the foxlike cariage of this Authour For this former free acknowledgement of the guilt of eternall death adherent to originall sinne in M Hords discourse is quite left out in this though there it was professed with