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
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
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as that it is not to be accounted any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at all Theologicall but meerly Logicall Let the condition of the decrees be rightly explicated according to Divinity and we shall have no need at all of Divinity for the right ordering of them A meer Logicall faculty by light of nature will serve for this For the decrees whereof we treat are meerely Intentiones rerum gerendarum Now for the ordering of these in what kind soever we have received Rules of the Schooles never yet that I know contradicted by any namely that they are to be ordered according to the condition of the things intended which are but two to wit the end and the means and all doe attribute priority to the intention of the end and posteriority to the intention of the means It is true men may erre in designing the right end as also in designing the right means and these errours are to be discovered and the truth cleered by that science whereunto the consideration of the end and means belong and not by Logick But agreement being made concerning the end and means there is no doubt to be made but that according to the most received Rules of Schooles the end must be acknowledged both first in intention and last in execution and contrarily the means last in intention and first in execution 2. But come we to the Decrees themselves the different opinions thereabouts which follow in the next place Now here I looked for different opinions about decrees in the plural number but I find the relation extends no farther then to one decree and that of Reprobation So at the first entrance reasons are promised even in this writing to be exhibited of chang of opinion in certain controversies in the plurall number when in the issue all comes but to one controversy and that about Reprobation Yet the Scripture speaketh fully of Election sparingly of Reprobation in most places leaving us to judge thereof by consequence from the doctrine of Election Yet some passages we have I confesse that give light and evidence to both alike For like as it is said Acts 2. last that God added daily to the Church such as should be saved so 2 Cor. 4. 3. it is said If our Gospell be hid it is hid to them that are lost and as it is signified Math. 24 24. that T is impossible seducers should prevaile over the elect so 2 Thes 2. both as much is signified ver 13. and also expressed ver 10. 11. that they shall prevaile among them that perish and the 1 Cor. 1. 18. we are given to understand joyntly that the preaching of the Crosse is to them that perish foolishnesse but unto us which are saved it is the power of God and Rom. 9. 18. that as God hath mercy on whom he will so also he hardneth whom he will And like as Acts 13. 48. we read that as many believed as were ordained to eternall life which phrase of ordaining to eternall life I conceive under correction to be all one with the phrase of Writing our names in Heaven Luke 10. 20. and writing us in heaven Hebr. 12. 23. and this phrase I take to be all one with the writing of us in the Book of life So on the other side we read that Whose names were not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the World should wonder when they beheld the Beâ—st and not so only but worship him also But give we every vessel leave to vent that liquor whereof it is full I come to the consideration of the different opinions here proposed concerning the decree of Reprobation and herein I will endeavour to open a clear way to the right understanding of the truth that your judgement may have the more free course in discerning it and withall to represent unto you the unreasonable carriage of our Adversaries in the setting downe of our Tenent whereby you may guesse what you are to expect from them prosecuting against it And herein I will insist upon these particulars The first shall be the Things Decreed The second the Cause of this decree The third the Persons on whom this Decree doth passe The fourth shall be that claw of Unavoydable Sin and Damnation 1. The Things Decreed are here said to be The casting off from grace and glory and the shutting of men up under Damnation Now I pray observe here in the first place that by casting off from grace and glory we mean no other thing then the not giving of grace and glory and by grace we mean the grace of Faith and Repentance the grace of Regeneration For like as in Election God purposeth we say to give this grace unto some which is the same with shewing mercy on them Rom. 9. 18. as we suppose so on the other side God purposeth to deny this grace unto others which in Scripture phrase is to harden them that being made opposite to Gods shewing mercy Rom. 9. 18. And for the farther clearing of the termes we say that God by giving Faith and Repentance doth cure that infidelity and impenitency which is naturall unto all as being borne in sin and by not giving this grace of Faith and Repentance unto others God leaves their naturall infidelity and impenitency uncured And if this Author means ought else by shutting up under sin then the not curing of their naturall infidelity and impenitency he doth us wrong and what he means thereby I know not As for shutting up under damnation that is not our phrase but we love to speak in plain tearmes and say that God doth purpose to inflict damnation on them whom he Reprobates Thus much for the cleering of the tearmes as touching the things Decreed Secondly observe I pray which is of principall consideration that here we have no cause at all specified why he refuseth to give them grace cunningly leaving it to an improvident Reader to conceive that the cause of the decree which is here specified to be the meer pleasure of Gods will is indifferently applyable to the not giving of grace and glory and to the shutting up under damnation as the cause thereof which is a notorious imposture yet I doe not think this Author guilty of it but others rather who abuse their witts by cunning courses to deceive the hearts of the simple Amongst the Fallacies observed by Aristotle there is one called Fallacia plurium interrogationum as when many things are put together and an answer is required to be made either affirmatively or negatively to them all as if they were but one when indeed the answer cannot be made aright without distinction of the things demanded the one whereof perhaps requires an answer affirmative the other negative As for example to instance as touching one of the Controversies here declined We are often demanded whether every one that heareth the Gospell be not bound to believe that Christ died for him Now I say this phrase Christ died
fundomento praedestinationis which he accounted the the doctrine of Free grace and cites to this purpose Cyprian Ambrose and Nazianzen and by the common prayers of the Church that God would convert the unbelievers unto the faith of Christ that the same doctrine which was in his judgement the foundation of predestination as he maintained it according to the Word of God was generally received in the Church of God Before I part from this I think fit to adde something concerning the stile here given to Lucidus before the revocation of his pretended error for here I find him stiled the Predestinarian Now I presume this Author that pretends so great reverence to gray haires and so much preferres Antiquity before Novelty hath good ground for this his denomination of him and that out of Antiquity Now I desire he would be pleased to communicate unto us his learned reading in Antiquity for this and the rather because in the whole story of the businesse between Faustus and Lucidus I find no mention of any such attribute given to his person or to the doctrine reputed by Faustus erroneous maintained by him The terme Praedestinatus qualirying a person I find first in Arnobius junior and from that time I find not the Praedestinati or Praedestinatians mentioned till the daies of Hinemarus about the year of our Lord God 850. And as for the story of the Predestinarian Heresy which this Author licks his lipps at the originall whereof is referred to the yeare 415 by Sigibertus it is very strange that in Austins daies it was not known unto him or being known not taken notice of by him nor by Prosper neither after him And Alphonsus à Castro in his Book contra Haereses professeth that the Author of this Heresy he found not neither in Sigibert nor in any other because indeed not one of those who wrote of Heresics makes mention of this Heresy besides Bernard of Lutzenburg in his Catalogue of Heretiques and he saith no more of it then what Sigibert mentioneth in his Chronicle And withall he addes that after this errour was buried by the space of almost a thousand years it was revived by John Husse the Bohemian Whereby it appears that Alphonsus was not of this Authors opinion in censuring this Lucidus for a Predestinarian And the first that I find to intimate so much is Hincmarus about the yeare 850. In like sort Prateölus acknowledgeth that Quis corum Dux institutor fuerit nescitur But Gerardus Vossius hath herein helped us with this conjecture referring the originall of this Heresy to the Monks of Adrumetum and Bishop Usher in his Historiá Godescalci saith Vossius was the first that charged those Adrumetine Monks to be the author thereof Yet if I be not deceived he might be beholding to Coccius for helping him to this conceit But this makes the matter more strange another way namely that Austin should not take notice of this Predestinarian Heresy seeing none was so well acquainted with the opinion of those his neighbour Monks as he being the man whom they consulted about the difference that rose thereabouts and wrote two Books thereupon and composed all And yet I see no reason why Vossius should referre it to the Adrumetine Monks hand over head when as it is cleer by the relation of them that came over to Austin to complaine thereof and to conferre with him thereupon that they were but few who were carried away with that errour whereof they complained and that it was but one that troubled the place of their Monastery herein who was as it were the Ringleader to the rest of which Vossius could not be ignorant And therefore I see no cause why he should charge them all indifferently or that party either who were tainted herewith as is pretended seeing there was an Antesignanus who led the rest of whom Vossius speaks nothing at all and I suppose he knew some good cause why Besides the Predestinarian Heresy is pretended to have risen Ab Augustini libris malè intellectis Now I find no colour of evidence hitherto that these Monks of Adrumentum whom Vossius makes the founders of this Heresy were led awry by the misunderstanding of Austins writings Neither doth Vossius any where that I know take any pains to cleare this And I would gladly be beholding to this Author that pretends so much zeale unto and skill in the knowledge of Antiquity and so boldly stileth Lucidus a Predestinarian for communicating unto us his rare evidences concerning this point out of his great observations And so much the rather to take mee off from mine errour who since the first time that I travelled in the search after this Predestinarian Heresy in dealing with Corvinus which is now some three years agoe I have been apt to conceive that this Heresy from the first was but a meer fiction of the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians cunningly to disgrace thereby the doctrine of St Austin And since the coming forth of Dr Ushers History in the cause of Godescalcus I have been confirmed herein as wherein he gives to understand that whereas Tyro Prosper wrote hereof before Sigibert although the Printer hath made him to speak as Sigibert doth namely that Haec Haeresis orta est ab Augustini libris malè intellectis yet that is not the language of Tyro himselfe but plainly this Haec Haeresis ab Augustino orta est and that learned Bishop hath shewed out of two Manuscripts of Tyro the one in Bennet Colledge in Cambridge the other in our Kings Library and this he farther confirmes by comparing the description which Gennadius makes of that which he calls the Predestinatian Heresy with the doctrine of Augustin lib. 5. cont Julian Pelag. cap. 4. de Bono Persev cap. 15. And withall the same learned Bishop makes it appeare that look what doctrine Sigebertus ascribes to the Predestinatians the same doctrine was charged upon Austin and such as concurred with him therein This I say that learned Bishop proves out of the beginning of the 6 Book Hypemnesticon Credere nos vel praedicare sugillatis quod Deus quosdam hominum sic praedestinet ad vitam regni caelorum ut si nolint or are aut jejunare aut in omni opere divino vigiles esse eos omninò perire non posse nec prorsus sui debere esse sollicitos quos Deus quia voluit semel jam elegendo praedestinavit ad vitam quosdam verò sic praedestinavit in Gehennae paenam ut etiam si credere velint si jejuniis or ationibus omnique se voluntati divinae subjicerent in his Deum non delectari vitam illis aeternam in totum dari non posse c. Now this in effect is the very Heresy of the Predestinatians related by Sigebert Therefore I much desire this Author would take the paines to prove that this pretended Predestinarian Heresy was indeed received to be an Heresy by the Catholique Church and not
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
alleaged by our Divines Act. Synod Dordrac pag. 270 In vivificandis hominibus Deus nullum initium humanae voluntatis expectat sed ipsam voluntatem bonam faciendo vivificat And drawing to an end I doe not write these things saith Melancthon to deliver dictates unto you who are most learned and most expert in the exercises of Piety And truly I know saith he that these things doe agree with yours haec cum tuis congruere sed sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 woven with a thicker thred ad usum accommodata Thus Melancthon unto Calvin having received his Books sent unto him and written of Free-will and Predestination 5. Within two years after I find a Letter written by Calvin unto Melancthon wherein he professeth his joy of their agreement as touching the main poynt in that whereabout their opinions were asked albeit with some difference in certain particulars it is Epist 63. amongst those of Calvins and the words are these Deo autem maximas gratias agere non desino qui dedit ut in ejus quaestionis summâ de quâ rogati eramus sententiae nostrae congruerent Tametsi enim paululum est discriminis in particulis quibusdam de re tamen ipsâ optime inter nos convenit The second Annotation of this Author is the circumstance or the ground of the three opinions mentioned The Stoicks deriving their necessity from the Starres or first matter The Manichees from the two supream causes And the Authors of the third from the peremptory decree of Almighty God And that in this difference the Stoicks and the Manichees have the better it being better as he saith to derive the necessity of evill actions or unhappy events from an evill God or from the course of nature then from the decree of that God who is infinitely good The substance of the opinion is all one the ground wherein they differ is but accidentall to the errour To this I answer 1. Is it so indeed Better to derive the necessity of unhappy events from an evill God or from course of nature then from the decree of God Is not God then to be accounted the author of evill in the way of punishment Is there any evill in the Citty and the Lord hath not done it Or doth it lesse become him to be the author of affliction then of prosperity Doth not the Lord in the same place and in the same manner professe that he delights in the execution of judgement as well as of mercy 2. As touching the necessity he speaks of whether in good or in evill actions consider I pray his carriage He did not object unto us that we made all the actions of men absolutely necessary but either so or the ends of men unavoidable Yet here he supposeth the former to serve his own turne in this present crimination he holds it up as it were contrary to his own conscience We acknowledge the actions of men to be free not one being performed by any but in such sort that they had power to forbear it and still have to forbear the like But upon supposition of Gods decree either to work in us any thing that is pleasing in his sight which to be his gracious course the Apostle expresly professeth Heb. 13. 20. or to permit any particular evill we willingly professe that as well upon this as upon Gods foreknowledge it followeth consequently that necesse est that such a thing come to passe but how not necessarily but agreeable to the condition of our reasonable natures contingently and freely And this Arminius in plain termes professeth in the poynt of evill to wit supposing God permits a man to will this or that evill Necesse est ut nullo argumentorum genere persuadeatur ad nolendum Exam. pag. 153. But I will farther display the doctrine of these Arminians and prove First that no evill comes to passe but that God did will it Secondly that never was there any greater necessity known to the World then that which these men bring upon good and evill actions a necessity that binds the Lord himselfe 1. As touching the first These words of Arminius are well known Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerum sucrum implere But I will prove it by their Doctrine of scientia Media For hereby they maintain that God foreseeth by what motives sinne will be hindered or not hindered without any prejudice to the liberty of the creatures will As also that God in the storehouse of his wisdome hath such store of morall impediments as that he knows thereby how to hinder any sinne if it pleased him His words are these Praeter illa sufficientia impedimenta etiam efficacia habet in suo sapientiae potentiae promptuario quibus productis certò infallibiliter peccatum impediretur And this is the difference with him between a sufficient impediment of sinne and impediment effectuall Effectuall is that upon the use whereof he knows full well that sinne will be hindered Sufficient is that upon the use whereof sinne will not be hindered and this is known to the Lord from everlasting Now let them tell me why would not God make choyce to use such an impediment which he knew would prove effectuall but such rather as he knew would prove ineffectuall Doth it not manifestly appear hereby that it is Gods will that sinne shall come to passe by his permission Like as the Scripture is expresse to this purpose as where it is said that Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and people of Israel were gathered together against the holy Sonne of God to doe that which Gods hand and his counsell had foredetermined to be done Now this is well known to have been no lesse then the ignominious handling and crucifying of the Sonne of God Acts 4. 28. And Revel 17. 17. God put into the hearts of the Kings to doe his will and to give their Kingdomes to the Beast as much as to say to use their Regall power to the supporting of Antichrist which we know was in part by Massacring the Saints of God 2. Now to discover the strange necessity that these men bring in upon all things It cannot be denied but that God knoweth all future things before they come to passe Therefore they are presupposed to be future in order of reason before God knows them to be future therefore all things future are either such by necessity of nature or by some cause not by any cause for if there were any cause hereof to wit to make them passe out of the condition of things meerly possible of their own nature into the condition of things future then this cause should be found either within God or without God Not without God can any cause hereof be found For this passage of things out of the condition of things meerly possible into the condition of things future was from everlasting therefore the cause hereof must have existence from everlasting But nothing was everlasting Extra
such a fall of theirs should come to passe by his permission and that upon such an occasion for even they that stumble at Gods word through disobedience and expressely said by Peter to be ordained thereunto thus I look out for a ground for that I deliver giving leave to the adversaries of Gods truth to roave at pleasure in the pouring forth of their impious dictates but come we to the particulars first as touching the gifts of nature I confes as touching the first of them creation that if that had not been he had never fallen but neverthelesse when God resolved to create he resolved to create all things for himselfe Even the wicked against the day of evill and if I erre in that I have an honourable Prophet to be my companion even Solomon himselfe As for preservation and sustentation I willingly confesse that if Judas had perished before he had been admitted into Christs service his damnation had been the more easy and God electing him ad prodendum sanguinem if I may be so bold as to speak in Austins language did determine that his sinne by Gods permission should be the more grievous by occasion of his advancement into the number of Christs disciples As for health strength beauty wisdome I see no reason why they should promote any mans damnation but that a foole or an ill-favoured or a weake or a sickly person may be as great a sinner as the wise man or beautifull or strong or healthy How because Christ died for the salvation of as many as doe believe which we all hold or dyed to procure faith regeneration for none as the Arminians hold any man is promoted to a greater measure of sinne thereby is a mistery to me As touching the ministry of the word Saint Peter speakes plainly of some that it had been better for them they had never known the way of right ousnesse than after they have known it to depart from the holy Commandement given to them he saith not this of all Austin professeth of some Reprobates that by the Gospell they are called Ut proficiant ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur As for the patience of God S. Paul professeth plainly that some after the hardnesse of their hearts which cannot repent despising the patience and long suffering of God and therein his goodnesse leading them to repentance doe thereby treasure up wrath against the day of wrath and Reprobation of the just judgement of God And I should think that even this God intended should come to passe by his permission otherwise he would have given them repentance or shortned their daies for give me leave to say with Austin Quantamlibet prebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis agat paenitentiam Contra Julian Pelag. l. 5. c. 4. As for knowledge that doth cleerely take away excuse grounded upon pretence of ignorance and like as our Saviour said to his Disciples Ioh. 13. If you know these things happy are yee if you doe them So likewise the more men know good things the more unhappy are they if they doe them not yet it is not necessary that knowledge should aggravate the damnation of the Reprobate as in case they doe thereby proficere ad exteriorem vitae emendationem for in this case surely mititus punientur but if they doe grow worse by occasion of their knowledge we spare not to professe that God intended this should come to passe by his permission why not as well as the crucifying of the Sonne of God Act. 4. 28. As for the vertues in the last place which here are pretended also to be given to worke for their harme and among them faith and repentance we are so farre from affirming that they are given for the harme of them that perish that we to the contrary maintaine that they are given to none but Gods elect and to bring them unto salvation Acts 13. 48. As many believed as were ordained to eternall life And faith is called the faith of the elect Tit. 1. 1. and Acts 11. 18. Then hath God also unto the Gentiles given repentance unto life Marke it well not unto death but unto life And Austin long agoe hath professed that of those who are not predestinated God brings not one unto wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby a man is reconciled unto God in Christ Knowledge is here shufled in among the rest of these vertues as if that were not all one with the illumination of the mind at least most deservedly to be ranged with it As for other vertues here mentioned as fortitude liberality temperance humility chastity where these vertues are bestowed after a naturall manner for no otherwise nor in any gracious manner are they found in Reprobates as I suppose ready to be called at any time to an account upon that poynt and to manifest six maine differences between the morall vertues of heathen men and the same vertues in name and as touching the substance of the acts wrought by them in Christians I should think they are rather given for their good that enjoy them than for their harme namely Ut profici ant ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur All the harme that may come by them that I can devise for the present is to grow proud of them and I willingly professe that nothing makes a greater separation from God then pride and it may be Moralists fret at this that their Morality is no better esteemed of But what thinke you May a man be proud of humility for that is one of the excellent vertues here specified why not of the naturall humility which is in them As Sir Philip Sidney observes in his defence of Poetry that Philosophers write Bookes against vaine-glory whereunto neverthelesse they set their names So they might write Books in commendation of humility and thereunto set their names also Yet I am not truly of such an opinion as to think that God should give any of these vertues to the end they should grow proud of them for I doe not find it any way requisite to a proud man that he should be vertuous for in my judgement pride is a very humble vice and disdaines not to dwell in the hearts of the meanest Plato could discerne it through Antisthenes his patcht coate and when Diogenes trod under foot Platoes hangings saying I tread under my foot Platoes pride it is observed that he did this majori festu with greater pride And as one sometimes said a man may be as proud of a Cloakebagge which he carrieth behind him as Cardinall Campeius was of his Sumpter-horse that followed after him and yet that pride of his might be of no better then of Brick-bats when all was known what shew soever it made unto the people And men of generous minds and parts and meanes answerable are many times found through the grace of God more truly humble than many a base fellow that hath nothing
upon the foresight of faith But predestination proceeds upon the good pleasure of God's will ergo The Major proposition I prove thus This phrase according to the pleasure of God's will excludes all outward causes And no wise man will referre the cause of a man's absolution to the good pleasure of the judge when a man's innocency is the cause of it For that is the cause of a thing whereby answere is made to the question why such a thing is done And this is the perpetuall phrase of Scripture as Is it not lawfull for me to doe what I will with mine own And All these things worketh the same spirit distributing to every man severally as he will and He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth It pleased the father that in him should all fulnesse dwell It is so ô father because thy good pleasure was such It is God that worketh in you both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure The Lord loved you because he loved you Deut 7. 7. They inherited not the land by their own sword neither did their own arme save them but thy right hand and thine arme and the light of they countenance because thou diddest favour them 2. My second argument is Therefore God gives faith because he did predestinate them As many believed as were ordained to everlasting life and God added daily to the Church such as should be saved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as appeares by the equipollency of both sentences Now hence I inferre Therefore God gives not faith because he hath not ordained them to everlasting life For if the affirmation be cause of the affirmation the negation is cause of the negation And the Scripture as ordinarily subjoyneth the deniall of grace to reprobation as the granting of grace to predestination For as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as perish is opposite to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as shall be saved And as the consequent of the one is said to be Faith so the consequent to the other is the deniall of the same or like grace As for example All they that are of God heare God's word so others heare them not because they are not of God as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such as shall be saved are added to God's Church so in whom is the Gospell hid only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them that perish Among whom doth Antichrist prevaile by all deceivablenesse only in them that perish Like as for the Elect on the contrary 't is not possible they should be seduced Mat 24. 24 and 2 Thes 2. 13 3. If predestination were upon the foresight of faith then it should be only upon the foresight of such a faith as perseveres to the end whence two inconveniences follow 1. That no man can be assured of his election untill his death which is quite contrary unto Scripture For Paul was assured of the election of the Thessalonians by observation of the works of their faith the labour of their love and the patience of their hope 2. In this case none can be strengthened against the power of temptation by the assurance of their election But thus we are strengthned by Chist Mat 24. 24. by St. Paul Rom 8. 29. 2 Thes 2. 13. 4. Election is absolute therefore reprobation is absolute The antecedent I prove If it be neither of faith nor of works then it is absolute but it is neither of faith nor works Not of works expresly Not of faith as appeates by the same reason whereby Paul proves it is not of works For the reason is this Before the children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the younger Therefore election is not of works Now say I we may as well conclude therehence therefore it is not of faith forasmuch as before they were borne they were as uncapable of faith as of works The consequence I prove thus Looke by what reason St. Paul proves that the election of Iacob was not of good works because before they were borne 't was said The Elder shall serve the younger by the same reason it is evident that the reprobation of Esau was not of evill works the subjection of Esau unto his younger brother as lively representing his reprobation as the dominion of Iacob over his elder brother represents his election 5. Predestination is defined by Austin to be Praeparatio gratiae the preparation of grace therefore reprobation which is opposite thereunto must be the not preparation of grace that is God's decree not to give grace like as the opposite is Gods decree to give grace Now God gives grace not according to works For he hath mercy on whom he will And hereupon Austin builds his doctrine of predestination Now by his doctrine predestination is absolute as Gerardus Vossius confesseth in his preface to his history of the heresy of Pelagius How can it be otherwise For if God conferres grace not according to mens works but according to his own purpose and grace How much more did he decree to give it not upon any foresight of works but of his mere pleasure And the Scripture as clearely testifies that as God hath mercy on whom he will so whom he will he hardneth that is of mere pleasure he denieth grace to some as of mere pleasure he grants it unto others And therefore reprobation grounded hereupon must needs be as absolute as predestination grounded upon the other 6. Like as in Scripture phrase Faith is said to be the faith of God's elect election is not said to be of those that are foreseen to to believe So the worshippers of the Beast are said to be those Whose names are not written in the booke of life They that are not written in the booke of life are described to be such that admire and worship the beast And the not writing of mens names in the booke of life doth as significantly represent their reprobation as the writing of mens names in heaven Luc 10. 20. Rev 20. 12 doth represent their election Thus as formerly I gave six reasons to justifie the absolutenesse of reprobation because he pretended the absolutenesse thereof was repugnant to reason so here I have given six more derived out of the word of God to prove that this doctrine is the revealed will of God to stop his empty mouth that clamoureth and only clamoureth that it is no part of God's revealed will And that this doctrine is not only conformable to right reason but by convincing arguments in right reason demonstrable I have already shewed And that all the absurdities this Authour blatters of they prove to be no better then the mere imagination of a vaine thing That which here he discourseth of a reasonable service comes out of it's place it belonged to the former reason in M. Hord's treatise and there I
OF All those weighty parcells of Gospell truth which the Arminians have chosen to oppose there is not any about which they so much delight to try and exercise the strength of fleshly reasonings as that of Gods eternall decree of Reprobation partly because the Scripture doth not so abound in the delivery of this Doctrine as of some others lying in a more immediate subserviency to the obedience and consolation of the Saints though it be sufficiently revealed in them to the quieting of their spirits who have learned to captivate their understandings to the obedience of Faith and partly because they apprehend the Truth thereof to be more exposed to the riotous opposition of mens tumultating carnall Affections whose help and assistance they by all meanes court and solicite in their contests against it Thus the Author of the Book entituled Gods love to Mankind being desired to render a reason of the change his Faith in passing over to the Tents of the Arminians he drawes forth only this one poynt to make shew of for the hinge of his alteration Many Learned men know with what applause that Book of his was received and divulged by that whole Generation which had then wrapped up the ball of the Errors promoted by it in the gilded covering of Preferment and carried it away before them They being by providence removed from that station and conjunction unto Power whence they had their effectual influence on the Earth God foresaw if he may be allowed to foresee what reinforcement upon other hands their Abominations would receive and therefore in his tender love made provision for his Church before hand as by others so in especiall by the renowned Author of this Treatise whose paines herein intended by him for the conviction of them with whom after much forbearance God intended to take another course are now seasonably brought to light to stop the mouthes of another Generation risen up in their steed enemies of Gods Soverainty and Grace untill He shall be pleased to deale otherwise with them God is not moâ—â—ed that which men sow they shall reap It is well known what spheare this Learned Author moved in how farre elevated above any possibility of my reaching the least esteeme to him or his labours This being desiâ—ed by my worthy and Learned friend the Publisher to expresse my thâ—ughts upon its perusall I shall take the boldnesse to say that this Treaâ—ise of our Author comes not any whit behind the choycest of thosâ— other eminent Workes of his wherein in this cause of God he faithfullâ— served his Generation I doubt not but it will appeare to the Readeâ— that he hath dealt with the Adversaries of the Truth in their chiefest â—olds advantages and strengths putting them to shame in the calumnyes and lyes which they make their refuge IOHN OWEN Vicecan Oxon. The Riches of Gods Love unto the Vessells of Mercy CONSISTENT WITH His Absolute Hatred or Reprobation Of the Vessells of Wrath. OR AN ANSWER UNTO A BOOK ENTITULED Gods Love unto Mankind Manifested by Disproving His Absolute Decree for their Damnation IN TWO BOOKES The First being a Refutation of the said Booke As it was Presented in Manuscript by Mr HORD unto Sir NATH RICH. The Second being an Examination of certain Passages inserted into M. HORDS Discourse formerly Answered by an Author that conceales his Name but was supposed to be Mr MASON Rector of Andrews-Undershaft in London By that Great and Famous Light of Gods Church WILLIAM TWISSE D. D. And Prolocutor of the late Assembly of DIVINES Whereunto are annexed Two Tractates of the same Author in Answer unto D. H. The one concerning Gods Decrees Definite or Indefinite The other about the object of Predestination TOGETHER WITH A Vindication of D. TWISSE from the exceptions of M r JOHN GOODWIN In his Redemption Redeemed By HENRY JEANES Minister of God's Word In CHEDZOY Rom. 9. 20. O Man who art thou that repliest against God shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made mee thus v. 21. Hath not the Potter power over the clay of the same Lump to make one vessell to honour and another unto dishonour OXFORD Printed by L. L. and H. H. Printers to the University for Tho Robinson Anno Salutis M. DC LIII TO THE WORSHIPFULL And his Honoured Uncle MICHAEL OLDISWORTH Esquire And a Member of the PARLIAMENT Of the Common-wealth of ENGLAND SIR I Have often heard you professe a deep dislike of the unnaturall vanity of the English Nation in preferring strangers in all callings above such of their own Country men as farre surpassed them And of this unjust partiality no profession hath tasted in a greater measure than that of Divinity for of our Ministers such whom God hath best fitted with parts and Learning for the discussing of controversies have been so undervalued in comparison of some Forraine Divines whose Learning was little better than systematicall as that they languished in their private studies and had dyed in obscurity unlesse the fame of their great abilities had been eccho'd over unto us by the generall applause of all Christendome Nay this sometimes hath not awakened us unto a due estimation of them D r Ames was looked upon abroad as one that amongst Protestant writers had few either superiors or equalls for subtilty in Logick and Scholasticall Divinity and yet he dyed an exile from his Native Soyle so that his Tombe might have had that inscription upon it which Scipio by his will appoynted to be on his Ingrata Patria ne ossa mea quidem habes Unthankfull Country thou hast not so much as my Bones Of how great reputation this our Author was beyond the Seas I had rather you should heare from the able and judicious Rivet than by mee who am censured by some who I am sure much overvalue their own judgements to have too high and admiring thoughts of him Rivet in his Epistle prefixed unto a late Book of D. Twisses against Arminius and Corvinus c. will assure you that The most Learned men in the whole Christian World even those who are of the adverse party doe confesse that there was nothing yet extant more accurate exact and full touching the Arminian Controversies than what was written by D. Twisse As also That he if any one hath so cleared and vindicated the Orthodoxe cause from objected absurdities and the calumnies of adversaries as that out of his labours not only the Learned but also those who are least versed in controversies may find enough whereby to disentangle themselves from the snares of Opposites Indeed there is none almost that hath Written against Arminianisme since the Publishing of any thing of D r Twisses on that Subject but have made very honourable mention of him and have acknowledged him to be the mightiest man in these Controversies that this Age hath afforded And yet this Worthy and able Combatant for the Truth and Cause of God was here at home designed unto Ruine as
thought that God elected some to bestow the Holy Ghost upon them that by working that which is good they might obtain everlasting life and who were those whom he thus elected namely such as whom he foresaw would believe and what was his reason for it surely this Quod ergo credimus nostrum est quod autem bona operamur Illius est qui Credentibus dat Spiritum Sanctum quod profeciò non dicerem si jam scirem etiam ipsam fidem inter dei munera reperiri quae dantur in eodem spiritu Marke I pray the manner of his Retractation I would not have said so if at that time I had known Faith to have been amongst the gifts of God which are given in the same spirit So then as soon as Austin came to acknowledg that Faith it selfe was the gift of God he therewithall came off from affirming that Quem sibi crediturum esse praescivit ipsum elegit cui Spiritum Sanctum daret ut bona operando etiam vitam aeternam consequeretur And like as before he maintained that God elected some to wit Believers to bestow the Holy spirit upon them that by working good workes they might obtain also everlasting life so now having found that Faith also is the gift of God he was accordingly to maintain that God elected some to bestow the Holy spirit upon them that both by believing and working good workes they might obtain everlasting life so that no longer was the foresight of Faith to precede election in Austins opinion to wit after once he knew Faith to be the gift of God And accordingly in his Book De Praedestin Sanctorum addressing himselfe to the rectifying of the Massilienses in the poynt of Predestination wherein they did not as yet discerne the truth of God Adhuc in quaestione caligant de Praedestinatione sanctorum Cap. 1. And againe Si quid de Praedestinatione Sanctorum aliter sapiunt Deus illis hoc quoque revelabit Ibid. Marke I pray you what course he takes to rectify them herein cap. 2. Priùs itaque fidem quâ Christiani sumus donum dei esse debemus ostendere and whereas he had performed this task very sufficiently before manifesting by divers pregnant passages of holy Scripture that Faith was the gift of God and the Massilienses did elude them by such a distinction as this Faith may be considered two waies either as touching Initium the first beginning of it or as touching Incrementum the augmentation thereof and accommodating this distinction said The passages of Scripture alleadged by Austin proceeded as touching the Augmentation of it which they willingly granted to be the work of God but not as touching the initiation of it which they still maintained to be the work of man Therefore Austin addresseth himselfe in that discourse of his to prove that the very Initiation of Faith is the work of God and not the Augmentation only His words are these Sed nunc iis respondendum esse video qui divina testimonia quae de hâc re adhibuïmus ad hoc dicunt valere ut noverimus ex nobis quidem nos habere ipsam fidem sed incrementum ejus ex Deo tanquam fides non ab ipso donetur nobis sed ab ipso tantum augeatur in nobis ex merito quo coepit à nobis And likewise in the 19. cap. of the same Book having propounded the opinion of the Pelagians namely that because God foresaw that we would be holy and unblameable before him in love therefore he elected and predestinated us in Christ before the foundation of the World and shew'd how this opinion contradicts that of the Apostle Ephes 1. 4 5. where it is said that God elected us in Christ and predestinated us before the foundation of the World that we should be holy and unblameable before him in love and perceiving withall how the Massilians did avoid this as nothing contrary to their Tenent though contrary to the Pelagian Tenent forasmuch as they maintained not that God foresaw any thing but our Faith and therefore God elected us before the foundation of the World that we should be holy and unblameable before him in love for these were their words Nos autem dicimus nostram Deum non praescisse nisi fidem ideo nos elegisse ut etiam sancti immaculati gratia atquè opere ejus essemus what course doth Austin take to beat them off but this namely to prove that Like as Holines so Faith also and that as touching the Initiation thereof is the work of God thus Sed audiant ipsi in hoc testimonio ubi dicit sortem consecuti simus praedestinati secundum propositum qui universa operatur Ipse ergo ut credere incipiamus operatur qui universa operatur So that it is cleer in the opinion of Austin that to take both himselfe and others off from premising the foresight of Faith unto Gods election it is sufficient to prove that Faith is the gift of God the work of God both touching the augmentation and touching the first introduction thereof And thus evincing the condition of Predestination as excluding all foresight of Faith from the condition of Predestination as being throughout the work of God in man rather then taking a contrary course as if the main 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were what is the condition of Gods decree of Predestination as here it is pretended and supposed And albeit it is commonly received of all sides as if it were without question that Faith is the gift of God yet we find practises on foot for the working of a manifest innovation herein For not to speak of their interpretations of their own meanings as in what sence they say God workes Faith in us it is apparent the Remonstrants now a daies doe as good as professe that Faith is not bestowed upon us for Christs sake in as much as they deny that Christ merited Faith for us For when the Author of the Censure passed upon the Remonstrants Confession disputeth thus At si hoc tantum meritus est Christus tum Christus nobis non est meritus fidem nec regenerationem the Remonstrants in the Answer hereunto forthwith confesse it in these words Sanè ita est Nihil ineptius nihil vanius est quà m hoc Christi merito tribuere Si enim Christus nobis meritus dicatur fidem regenerationem tum fides conditio esse non poterit quam a peccatoribus Deus sub comminatione mortis aeternae exigeret And by the way marke I pray that not any difference is put between Faith and Regeneration manifestly signifying thereby that as they grant it to be the work of man to believe so we are commanded to make our selves a new heart And as for ordering of the decrees which here is added to compleat the main 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as here is pretended that in my opinion is so farr off from being the main 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
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
full thus Anathema illi qui dixerit illum qui periit non accepisse ut salvus esse possit id est vel de baptizato vel de illius aetatis Pagano qui credere potuit noluit By which latter clause it appears that accipere ut salvus esse possit is no other then to receive Possibilitatem credendi I say Possibilitatem not Potentiam because I find this is Faustus his usuall phraise as it was the phraise of Pelagius before him and this is as much as to say that every man hath power to believe if he will Now observe I pray This kind of power is meerely nature not that which we commonly call Grace whereby we understand something distinct from nature And Austin acknowledgeth both De Gen. contr Manichae lib. 1. cap. 3 that all men possunt credere si velint and that this is no more then is signified by that naturall illumination wherewith God enlightens every man when he comes into the world Iohn 1. 9. And De Praedest Sanct. cap. 5. Posse habere fidem sicut posse habere charitatem naturae est hominum Fidem verò habere sicut charitatem habere gratiae est fidelium And more then this the state of the question between Pelagius and the Catholiques of those daies is so proposed by Austin as not at all to consist about the possibility of believing or doing any good work but meerly about the willing doing of it In so much that Austin professeth that if Pelagius would acknowledge the will and doing of good to be from God as he did the possibility hereof to be from God there should be an end of all controversy between them and Pelagius should be received as a good Catholique This appears in his book De Gratiâ Christi contra Pelagium Caelestium cap. 6. Pelagius his words were these speaking of God Qui ipsius voluntatis operis possibilitatem dedit Hanc autem possibilitatem saith Austin in naturâ eum ponere de verbis ejus superioribus clarum est Sed ne nihil de gratiâ dixisse videretur adjunxit quique ipsam ipsam voluntatem gratiae suae adjuvat semper auxilio Now this adjutorium possibilitatis in what sence he delivered it Austin professeth to be obscure both as touching the nature of it and as touching the manner how he conceived the nature of man to be aided thereby but in other places saith he where he speaks more plainly it appears to consist in giving a law and affording instruction Now by the way mark Austins observation upon these words of Pelagius Quique ipsam possibilitatem gratiae suae adjuvat semper auxilio non ait saith Austin ipsam voluntatem vel ipsam operationem quod si diceret non abhorrere à doctrinâ Catholicâ videretur Now voluntatem adjuvari in Austins meaning is Voluntatem praeparari à Domino ut velit operationem adjuvari is voluntatem corroborari ne frustrà velit The one operation he calls grace prevenient the other subsequent according to that Nolentem praevenit ut velit volentem subsequitur ne frustrà velit And cap. 25. of the same Book Non solum Deus posse nostrum donavit atque adjuvat sed etiam velle operari operatur in nobis whereby it appears that Voluntatem atque operationem nostram adjuvari à Deo is Deum operari in nobis velle operari quod bonum est which if Pelagius had acknowledged he had been received for a Catholique So that he excepted not against him for acknowledging Possibilitatem volendi atque agendi quod bonum est As touching the second Anathema I say that Vas contumeliae may be taken in a double sense either to signify a vessel deserving contumely deserving wrath or to signify a Vessell ordained to contumely and to the suffering of eternall wrath In the first sense there is no question but a man may change from being a vessell of contumely or a vessell of wrath into the condition of a vessell of honour but in the second sense it is as impossible there should be any such change as it is impossible there should be any change in God whereof I think there is no question and both Faustus and Lucidus might take the phraise in the former sense but if they did take it in this latter sense dares this Author justify them 2. Now I come to the credit and authority of this story concerning the Councell of Arles and 1. I say suppose it be a truth yet about the yeare 494. there was a Roman Councell wherein Gelasius and 70 Bishops with him justify the writings of Austin and Prosper and condemne the writings of Cassian and Faustus by whose procurement it is here pretended the Bishops of Arles subscribed this Epistle of Faustus unto Lucidus And the Fathers of this pretended Councell of Arles are not reckoned up above sixteen 2. The credit of this story lyeth wholly upon Faustus his relation and his honesty therein a man infamous in the Church for opposing Austin and his doctrine of grace and predestination as appears by the Writings of Fulgentius Petrus Diaconus Alchimus Avitus and others Ado Viennensis in Chron. ad ann 492. writes of him thus Faustus ex Abbate Monasterii Licinensis apud Regem Galliae Episcopus facius Pelagianorum dogma destruere conatus which yet may be made apparent to have been meerly in pretence in errorem unde qui ejus sensus in hac parte Catholicos praedicant sicut Germadius de Viris illustribus scribens omninò errant Ita enim liberum arbitrium tà m Augustinus quam caeteri Catholici in Ecclesia Dei docent ut illuminatio virtus salus illi à Christo per Christum in Christo sit Faustus verò iste ita liberum Christianorum arbitrium docere conatur ut illuminatio virtus salus non à Christo sed a naturâ sit Contra hunc scribit beatissimus Avitus Viennensis Episcopus lucidissima fide ejus redarguens errorem similiter Joannes vir eruditissimus Antiochenus Presbyter Isidore in his Book De Viris illustribus testifies that Fulgentius wrote seven Books against Faustus Qui mirâ calliditate Catholicus videri volebat cum Pelagianus esset Auctor quoque Vitae 5 ti Fulgentii testatur à Sancto Fulgentio refutatos libros duos Fausti de Grat. Liber Arbitrio And Petrus Diaconus in his Book De Incarnatione Gratiâ Christi cap. ultim Anathema dicit Libris Fausti And this Bellarmine de Script Eccles writes to admonish them who in these Letters contend that Faustus was a Catholique Farther observe the Bishops who are pretended to have subscribed Faustus his Epistle to Lucidus are numbred these Auxianus Claudius Euphronius Eutropius Faustus Julianus Leucadius Megetius Patiens Paulus Pragmatius But the Bishops that were assembled at the Councell of Arles are These Agricii nomine Cataphronius Caelestinus Caesarius Constantini nomine Leontius Contumeliosius
same nature with the naturall faculties of man As for the graces of Gods spirit what are these but the three Theologicall vertues all other are but Morall vertues sanctified by these Now shew me what Faith there is in God of the same nature with our Faith differing only in degree What hope there is in God of the same nature with our hope differing only in degree what charity there is in God of the same nature with our Charity differing only in degree These indeed being of all other the most peculiar fruits of regeneration whereby we are renewed after the image of God as touching the adventitious qualification of our natures should have Attributes divine answerable unto them if any of the same nature with them differing only in degree Yet herein as I conceive consists not so much our participation of the Divine Nature as in that the Spirit of God the Father and God the Sonne is communicated unto us given unto us to be the immediate fountain of all actions and motions spirituall in us 3. And albeit these Attributes which in common doe denominate God and man are one thing in God and in man another yet this nothing derogates from our imitation of God and striving to be perfect and holy in our kind as creatures like as God is perfect and holy in his kind as Creator And that I may represent some authority for my discourse whereas this Author represents none for his it is a poynt generally received in the Schooles that in this weaknesse of our understanding we come to know what God is by negation rather then by affirmation Capreolus upon the first of the Sentences Dist 2. Quest 1. rehearseth diverse passages out of Aquinas to this purpose as out of 1. Contra Gentes cap. 14. In consideratione Divinae substantiae praecipue utendum est via remotionis Nam Divina substantia omnem formam quam intellectus noster attingit suâ excedit immensitate Et sic ipsam apprehendere non pessumus cognoscendo quid est sed aliqualiter ejus notitiam habemus cognoscendo quid non est tantóque ejus notitiae magis appropinquamus quanto plura per intellectum nostrum poterimus ab eo removere Tanto enim unumquodque perfectiùs cognoscitur quanto differentias ejus ab alio pleniùs intuemur Quià in consideratione Divinae substantiae non possumus accipere quid quasi genus nec distinctionem ab aliis rebus per differentias affirmativas accipere possumus eam oportet accipere per differentias Negativas Id. 3. Contra gentes cap. 47. Per effectus Dei pertingere possumus ut cognoscamus de Deo quia est quod causa aliorum est aliis supereminens ab omnibus remotus hoc est ultimum perfectissimum nostrae cognitionis in hac vitâ ut Dionysius dixit lib. de Mysticâ Theologiâ Cum Deo quasi ignoto conjungimur quod quidem contingit cùm de Deo quid non sit cognoscimus quid vero sit penitùs manet ignotum unde ad hujusmodi sublimissimae cognitionis ignorantiam demonstrandam dicitur de Mose Exod 20. quod accessit ad caliginem in qua Deus er at In the consideration of the Divine Essence we must chiefly use the way of negation for the Divine Essence through its immensity doth exceed every forme that our understanding can conceive So that we cannot apprehend it by knowing what it is but after a sort we have the knowledge thereof by knowing what it is not And so much nearer doe we approach to the knowledge thereof the more we are able to remove from the nature of God For every thing is known so much the more perfectly by how much the more at full we doe behold how it differeth from other things Now in the consideration of the Divine essence we cannot take any thing as the Genus thereof neither can we apprehend its distinction from other things by differences affirmative and therefore we must apprehend it by differences negative The same Thomas in his Third Book Contra Gent. cap. 47. By the effects of God saith he we may attain to know that God is and that he is the cause of other things eminent above them and removed from them all and this is the last and most perfect degree of our knowledge in this life as saith Dionysius in his Book of Mysticall Divinity We are conjoyned with God as unknown which verily comes to passe when we know of God what he is not but what he is it remains utterly unknown unto us and therefore to demonstrate our ignorance of this most sublime knowledge it is said of Moses Exod. 20. that he came unto the darknesse where God was The same Capreolus proceeds to shew out of Aquinas in 1 Sent. Dist 8. q. 1. art 1. ad 4. How we must make progresse in our knowledge of God by way of remotion or negation Quando inquit in divinis procedimus per viam remotionis primò negamus corporalia Secundò intellectualia secundum quod inveniuntur in creaturis ut bonitas sapientia tunc remanet in intellectu Quod est nihil amplius unde est sicut in quadam confusione When saith he we proceed by way of remotion or negation in searching out the Divine nature first we deny of him all corporall things and secondly we deny of him all intellectuall things after such a sort as they are found in the creatures as godnesse and wisdome mark this well for these and such like are the vertues which this Author saith are of the same nature in God and man differing only in degree and then there remains in the understanding id quod est as much as to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ens and nothing more and hence the understanding remains as in a certain confusion And indeed the notion of entity is most generall most abstract and if any notion signifies one and the same nature such as may be affirmed of God and the creature surely this is it Now observe Aquinas his judgement concerning this out of the same Capreolus in these words Ad ultimum autem Essentiam ipsam secundum quod est in creatur is ab ipso removemus tunc remanet intellectus noster in quadam tenegrâ ignorantiae secundum quam ignorantiam quantum ad statum viae pertinet optime Deo conjungimur ut Dionysius dicit haec est caligo in qua Deus habitare dicitur To the last I answer the very entity or existence in the creatures we remove from God and then our understanding remains in the darknesse of ignorance according to which ignorance so farre forth as it pertains to our condition as Viatores and in the way we are conjoyned with God in the best manner as Denis saith and this is the darknes wherein God is said to dwell By this let any man judge whether this Authors discourse be not as opposite to the discourse of
understandings purged from prejudice and false principles 5. My fifth argument is this If sinne be the cause of Reprobation that is of the decree of damnation then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God not by necessity of nature as all that hitherto I have known confesse But I say neither can it be by the free constitution of God for mark what a notorious absurdity followeth hence and that unavoidably namely that God did ordaine that upon foresight of sinne he would ordaine them to damnation marke it well God did ordaine that he would ordaine or God did decree that he would decree In which words Gods eternall decree is made the object of Gods decree Whereas it is well known that the objects of Gods decrees are meerely things temporall and cannot be things eternall we truly say God did decree to create the World to preserve the World to redeeme us call us justify us sanctify and save us but it cannot be truly said that God did decree to decree or ordaine to ordaine for to decree is the act of Gods will and therefore it cannot be the object of the act of Gods will Yet these arguments I am not so enamoured with as to force the interpretations of Scripture to such a sense as is sutable hereunto presuming of the purity of my understanding as purged from prejudice and false principles I could willingly content my selfe with observation of the Apostles discourse in arguing to this effect Before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the elder shall serve the younger therefore the purpose of God according to election stands not of works In like manner may I discourse Before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the elder shall serve the younger therefore the purpose of God concerning Reprobation stands not of works And like as hence it is inferred that therefore election stands not of good works so therehence may I inferre that therefore reprobation stands not of evill works 6. If sinne foreseen be the cause meritorious of reprobation then faith and repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto election For therefore evill works foreseen are made the meritorious cause of reprobation because evill works exsistent are the meritorious cause of damnation And if this be true then also because Faith and Repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto salvation then by the same force of reason faith repentance and good workes foreseen must be the disposing cause unto election But faith repentance and good workes foreseen are not the disposing causes unto election as I prove thus 1. If they were then the purpose of God according to election should be of faith repentance and good works which is expressely denyed by the Apostle as touching the last part and may as evidently be proved to be denied by him in effect of the other parts also by the same force of argumentation which he useth as for example from this anticedent of the Apostles before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it no more evidently followeth that therefore the purpose of God according to election is not of workes than it followeth that the same purpose of God according to election is not of faith nor of repentance For before they were borne they were no more capable of faith or of repentance than of any other good works And undoubtedly faith and repentance are as good works as any other 2. If God doth absolutely work faith in some and not in others according to the meer pleasure of his will then it cannot be said that faith foreseen is the cause of any mans election For in this case faith is rather the means of salvation then salvation a means of faith and consequently the intention of salvation rather precedes the intention of faith than the intention of faith can be said to precede the intention of salvation And to this the Scripture accords Acts 1348. As many believed as were ordained to everlasting life making ordination to everlasting life the cause why men believed answerable hereunto is that Acts 2. last God added daily to the Church such as should be saved and that of Paul to Titus according to the faith of Gods elect So that according to Pauls phrase fides est electorum but according to the Arminians Doctrine the inverse hereof is a more proper and naturall predication as to say electio est fidelium But God doth absolutely work faith in some men according to the meer pleasure of his will denying the same grace to others which I prove 1. By Scripture Rom. 9. 18. God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth compared with Rom. 11. 30. Yee in times past have not believed but now have obtained mercy where it appears by the Antithesis that to find mercy is to believe that is to obtain the grace of faith at the hands of God in Saint Pauls phrase 2. By cleare reason for if it be not the meer pleasure of Gods will that is the cause hereof then the cause hereof must be some good workes which he finds in some and not in others whence it manifestly followeth that God giveth grace according unto works which in the phrase of the ancients is according to merits and for 1200 years together this hath been reputed in the Church of God meere Pelagianisme 2. I further demand what that good worke is whereupon God workes it in one when he refuseth to worke it in another Here the answer I find given is this that God doth work in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle credere modo velit Now of the absurdity hereof I appeale to the very light of nature and let all the books that ever were written on this argument be searched and let it be enquired whether ever any did expresse themselves in the manner of so palpable and grosse absurdity as wherein the act of willing is made the condition of it selfe whence it followeth evidently that it must be both before it selfe and after it selfe for the condition must allwaies exsist before the thing conditionated Yet they are driven upon these rocks of absurdities in spight of their teeth so shamefull is the issue of their discourses who in hatred of Gods truth revealed in Gods word and in a proud conceit of their own performances in the way of argumentation dare prescribe rules to all others how to carry themselves in the interpretation of Scriptures as namely to be so warie as that they doe not deliver any thing repugnant to understandings purged from prejudice and false principles as if the word of God supposed them that are admitted to the studying thereof to have their understandings already purged from prejudice and false principles not that it is given by God for this very end namely to purge our understandings for what is the illumination or opening of the eyes of the mind other than the purging of
of a divine power supreame Now as God made himself known by his works so I nothing doubt but herewithall it was their duty to know him and according to their knowledge to serve him and glorifie him in acknowledgment of his glorious nature so farre as they took notice of it But as for a rule whereby they should worship him I know none that God had given them or that they could gather from contemplation of the creatures And surely the knowledge of God as a Creator only is nothing sufficient to salvation but the knowledge of him as a redeemer And therefore seeing the World by wisdome knew not God in the wisdome of God it pleased God by the foolishnesse of Preaching to save them that believe 1 Cor. 1. 21. And the Gentiles are set forth unto us in Scripture as such who knew not God 1 Thes 4. 5. 2 Thes 1. 8. And had they means sufficient without and ability sufficient within to know him How could it be that none of them should know him Was it because they would not How absurd a conceit is this to every one that understands and considers common Principles of Philosophy namely that the things that are subject to our free-will are contingentia aequaliter as soon falling out one way as the other And it is well known not only what paines they have taken but also with what strange successe in searching after the nature of the first mover as appears by Aristotle in the 12 th of his Metaphysicks Yet did not he attain for ought ever I could find to the acknowledgement of his free agency in the making of the world and in the government thereof Yet were they inexcusable and thus farre their knowledge brought them Rom. 1. 20. in changing the glory of the incorruptible God to the similitude of the image of a corruptible man and of birds and of fourefooted beasts and of creeping things The other place is Acts 17. 26. That he takes to be more full for his purpose there the Apostle speaking in an University and which had been miserably corrupted with the Atheisticall doctrine of Aristotle concerning an eternity of the World and Gods working necessarily not freely tending to the quenching of that light of naturall instinct which is more or lesse found in all as touching the Divine providence yet the Apostle even amongst such makes bold to suppose the creation of the World by God and that therefore he is Lord of Heaven and Earth and also obtrudeth upon their naturall consciences that God it is who giveth life and breath and all things and that he of one bloud whom we know to be Adam made all mankind to dwell on all the face of the Earth that he hath assigned the seasons of the yeare and what are they but Spring Summer Autumne Winter depending upon the motions of the heaven above and the bounds of their habitations what is that but the severall habitable parts of the earth for the habitation of all creatures in whose Nostrills is the breath of life not that every man or Nation hath his place of habitation appoynted by God though this also be true but nothing agreeable to Arminian Divinity which like an East wind blasts the providence of God throughout this the Apostle doth not obtrude upon them but the former generalls only and all this God hath done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they should seeke the Lord now this may be understood two waies either de facto God did intend that this indeed should be done by them or ex officio that it should be their duty of this distinction this Author takes no notice but hand over head takes it in the first sense as it were in spight both of the Apostle saying Who hath resisted his will And of the Psalmist professing that what he willeth he hath done both in Heaven and Earth But indeed this is mans duty to endeavour to know him that made him to this purpose he hath indued him with an understanding heart The spirit of man being as the lampe of God which searcheth all inwardnesse But as for the words following if happily they might seeke after him and find him though he be not farre from every one of us so that though he be not farre from every one of us in as much as in him we live and move and have our being and though they should seeke after him yet upon an if the Apostle plainly puts the finding of him For albeit Durand professeth that by the very light of nature we may attaine to the knowledge of God touching these things that belong to the unity of his nature yet who ever amongst the Gentiles attained hereunto after all their search God hath set the World in mans heart saith Solomon yet can he not find out the worke that he hath wrought from the beginning to the end we are yet to seeke in the knowledge of the creature how much more in the knowledge of the Creator Yet what shall all such knowledge profit a man if he be ignorant in the knowledge of him as a redeemer I come to Prosper l. 2. De vocatione Gentium cap. 4. God hath so disposed of the World as that the reasonable creature by the contemplation of Gods workes and tast of so many blessings imbuerctur he doth not say might be drawne but imbueretur might be indued to wit with the knowledge of God in such sort as to move him ad cultum dilectionem Dei. And all here mentioned both as touching the knowledge of God and touching the service and love of him is but as the object of mans duty signifying what ought to be done by him not as the object of Gods decree as whereby he determined what should be done indeed by him For had he determined this who could have resisted him Shall we say that voluntatis omnipotentis effectus impeditur a voluntate creaturae as Austin expresseth the absurdity hereof As for that which followeth not in the same Chapter as this Author writes whether out of his own reading or mistaking anothers dictates I know not but in the chapter following to wit c. 2. the former place being indeed c. 1. according to my book not cap. 4. As this Author quotes it And it is a truth considered in generall for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to seeke the Lord God did move both Jewes and Gentiles the Jewes by his word over above his workes but the Gentiles only by his workes But the manner of the revelation made to the one and to the other was farre different as the same Author expresseth cap. 3. Aliter eos juvit quos ad cognoscendum se caeli terrae testimoniis conveniebat aliter illos quibus non solum elementorum famulatu sed etiam doctrina legis Prophetarum oraculis miraculorum signis Angelorum cooperationibus consulebat c. God he saith intended not to feed the Gentiles with outward and more common blessings
augetur munere charitatis ut possint that is not only to will that which is good but so intensely to will it as to prevaile over the flesh lusting against the spirit whereby it comes ut non modo velint sed possint and consequently efficiant quod velint So that posse simpliciter doth include velle and addes such strength thereto as now to goe on to the doing of that it wills without restraint from the flesh And that this posse is but an augmentation of the gratious disposition of the will appeares by the same Austin de corrept gratia cap. 11. Prima gratia est qua sit ut habeat homo justitiam si velit secunda ergo plus potest qua etiam sit ut velit tantum velit tantoque ardore diligat ut carnis voluntatem contraria concupiscentem voluntate spiritus vincat The first grace is that whereby a man may have righteousnesse if he will therfore the second grace is of more power as whereby a man is made to will and that in such measure as by the will of the spirit to overcome the will of the flesh affecting that which is contrary thereunto And in the very next chapter c. 12. He calles this prevailing will Posse simply Tantum spiritu sancto accenditur voluntas eorum ut ideo possint quia sic velint ideo velint quia Deus sic operatur ut velint Their will is in such measure inflamed with the Holy Spirit that therefore they are able to doe that which is good because they will in such a measure therefore they will in such a measure because God so works as to make them willing in such measure Austin goes on in this manner Nam si in tanta infirmitate vitae hujus ipsis relinqueretur voiuntas sua ut in adjutorio Dei manerent si vellent nec Deus in iis operaretur ut vellent inter tot tantas tentationes infirmitate sua voluntas ipsa succumberet ideo perseverare non possent quia deficientes infirmitate nec vellent aut non ita vellent infirmitate voluntatis ut possent For if in so great infirmitie of this life their will were left unto thē that in the helpe of God they might continue if they would God should not work in them that they would amongst so many and so great tentations this will it selfe would sinke under the burthen of them and therefore could not persevere because failing through infirmity they would not or at least they would not in such a measure through the wills infirmity as to be able to stand So that posse simpliciter still with Austin includes the will and is a denomination of the will arising from the strength of it prevailing above the flesh lusting to the contrary In like sort Honorius Augustodunensis de praedest lib. arbit diverse times ascribes posse to grace subsequent like as he ascribes velle to grace prevenient as when he sayth Deus operatur in electis suis sua gratia praeveniendo velle subseqendo posse And againe gratiam accipimus cum nos Deus praevenit ut velimus subsequitus ut possimus And againe Gratia Dei praevenit ut bonum quod sprevit cupiat sequitur ut illud implere praevaleat So that in effect this posse comes to be all one with agere or perficere quod volumus For when we not only will that which is good but so affectionately will it as to prevaile over the flesh lusting against it all inward impediments being thus mastered the perfecting of that we will must needes follow But as for that posse si velint this goes before the willing of it And I see no reason to the contrary but that we may with Austin acknowledge such a power common to all which in the disputations between Austin and Pelagius was called possibilitas agendi quod bonum est and Austin was so farre from excepting against it as maintained by Pelagius that more then once he professeth that in case like as he acknowledged posse to be from God so he would acknowledge velle and agere to be from God he should be received for a good Catholique in this by Austins judgment I will cite a passage or two out of Austin expresly signifying this that out of his booke de gratia Christi contra Pelag Caelest The first is cap 6. Pelagius his words are these Qui ipsius voluntatis operis possibilitatem dedit whereupon Austin writeth thus Hanc autem possibilitatem in natura eum ponere de verbis ejus superioribus clarum est Sed ne nihil de grati a dixisse videretur adjunxit Quique ipsam possibilitatem gratiae suae adjuvat semper auxilio non ait ipsam voluntatem vel ipsam operationem quod si diceret non abhorrere a doctrina Apostolica videretur as much as to say did he acknowledge this he should be a good Catholique Now ad juvare voluntatem operationem in Austins phrase is effectually operari ut velit operetur homo quod bonum est as appeares by that which followeth Sed ait to wit Pelagius ipsam possibilitatem illud videlicet ex tribus quod in natura locavit gratiae suae adjuvat semper auxilio Now marke Austins interpretation of him thus ut scilicet in voluntate actione non ideo laus sit Dei hominis quia sic vult homo ut tamen ejus voluntati Deus ardorem dilectionis inspiret so that adjuvare voluntatem in Austins phrase is inspirare voluntati dilectationis ardorem So then I see no reason but that wee may well grant unto our adversaries that all men have a power to believe if they will and from the love of temporall things to convert themselves to the keeping of Gods commandements But this is meere nature in Austins judgement for he calls it in that very chapter naturalem possibilitatem and cap. 47. coming to an issue Si ergo consenserit nobis non solam possibilitatem sed ipsam quoque voluntatem actionem divinitus adjuvari sic adjuvari ut sine ullo adjutorio nihil bene velimus agamus eamque esse gratiam Dei per Jesum Christum nihil de adjutorio gratiae Dei quantum arbitror inter nos controversiae relinquetur And indeed to say that a man hath power to believe and repent if he will this is not to maintaine any universall grace otherwise then as nature may be called grace For grace is goodnesse but goodnesse doth not consist in a power to do good if we will but it is an habituall disposing of the will to that which is good only how much more is it so of grace which we count supernaturall goodnesse Neither is the maintenance of such a power to doe good any contradiction to holy Scripture testifying that Men cannot believe cannot repent cannot please God cannot be subject to the
the word of God But Ecce Rhodus ecce Saltus we are come to the Dialogue it selfe where he undertakes to make good that which he saith And here begins the Enterlude Tempted Woe is me I am a Castaway I am utterly rejected from grace and Glory CONSIDERATION Let me take liberty to set down what I should think fit to answer unto such a complaint Now my Answer is this Who hath revealed this unto thee Art thou privy Councellour to the Almighty We are taught that secret things belong to the Lord our God but the things revealed are for us and for our Children to doe them Now where and when and how hath God revealed this his counsell unto thee namely concerning thy rejection from Grace Glory We know no other revelations divine then are contayned in his Word Now hath God in his word revealed unto thee more then unto me that thou art a reprobate The word saith unto thee If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom 10. 9. Now how canst thou make it appeare that this belongs lesse unto thee then to any Martyr that ever was content to lay downe his life for Christ Wilt thou say Thy sinnes make thee to conceive so I answer are thy sinnes greater then were the sinnes of Manasses who made his sonnes passe through the fire to Molech gave himselfe to witchcraft and sorcery and filled Jerusalem with bloud from corner to corner If his sinns were not sufficient to conclude that he was a Reprobate why should thy sins be thought sufficient to conclude that thou art a Cast-away Are thy sinnes greater then Sauls were who was a Blasphemer a Persecutor of the Saints of God from Citty to Citty Yet was he received unto mercy Wilt thou say Thy sinnes have been committed since thy calling Yet are they greater then was the sinne of Peter in denying Christ his Master with execrations and oathes And these sinns were committed not only after his calling but even within his Masters hearing too Yet he went out and wept bitterly And Christ as soone as he was risen sent word of his resurrection by name to Peter to comfort him Nay hath not God taught us in his word that the bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne 1 John 1. And how canst thou make it appeare that any one that ever was or is hath greater interest therein then thy selfe wilt thou say this remedy belongs unto none but such as believe and repent but I doe not I answere in like sort there was a time when Paul believed not and when every one believed not yet at length they believed and so maist thou wilt thou say But I cannot believe and repent I answer this is the condition of all till God takes away the stony heart out of their bowells and gives them a heart of flesh and puts his owne spirit within them wilt thou say God gives grace to others but not to thee I answer there was a time when God had not mercy on them at length an houre came wherin he called them so an houre may come wherin he may call thee And thou hast no more cause to conclude that he hath rejected thee then every Child of God had before his calling that God had rejected him without grace neither thou canst nor they could believe but grace can bring all to faith and repentance and thou hast no more cause to think that God will not bring thee to faith then any elect had before his calling to think that God would not bring him to faith Now seeing this grace is given in the Word doe thou wait upon God in his owne ordinance which any naturall man hath power to doe as namely to goe heare a sermon thou knowest not how it may worke upon thee yea though thou commest thither with a wicked mind For we read of some that comming to take Christ were taken by him And Father Latimer taking notice of some that come to Church to take a nap yet never the lesse saith he let them come they may be taken napping Minister Discourage not thy selfe thou poore afflicted soule God hath not cast thee off for he hateth nothing that he hath made but bears a love to all men and to thee amongst the rest CONSIDERATION And not only poore but miserable also is that afflicted soule that hath no better comforter whether we consider the nature of the consolation or the warrant of it For first hath not God made Froggs and Toades and Devills as well as man And hath an Arminian that boasts so much of strongest arguments of comfort no better comfort to an afflicted soule then that she is Gods creature which is the condition of a Frogge and a Divill and a damned spirit 2. Then as touching the warrant of it Is the booke of Wisdome the best store-house of comfort for an afflicted soule a booke writen by Philo the Jew that living after Christs passion resurrection and ascention yet never believed in him Againe speake out and tell us what is the fruit of that love which God beares to all men Hath he ordained to give Salvation unto all to this afflicted soule in particular If he hath not but damnation rather unto some and particularly to this soule for upon what ground darest thou say or canst assure he hath not art not thou as miserable a comforter to her as ever Jobs friends were to him Or hath God ordained to give all men the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance if so then either absolutely or conditionally if absolutely then all must be regenerate all must believe and repent If conditionally speake it out and let thy Patient know what condition that is on performance whereof by man God will give him faith say what thou wilt the comfortable issue shall be this That grace is given according to workes and this indeed is the only Arminian consolation Tempted 1. God hateth no man as he is his creature but he hates a great many as they are involved in the first transgression and become guilty of Adams sinne CONSIDERATION Pooresoule suffer not thy selfe to be instructed by them that labour to deprive thee not only of the comfort of Gods grace but of the comfort of common sence Dost thou well understand what it is to hate a man as a sinner and not as a man If hatred be no more then displeasure surely whatsoever be the cause of it in hating thee he is displeased with thee as thou art his creature and that in thy proper kind of man if withall it signify punishment whatsoever the cause thereof be surely he punisheth thee as man though not for thy natures sake for that is the worke of God but for some corruption he finds in thee And we should prove very sorry comforters if on such a distinction as this we should ground any true
It may be thou maist have experience of the same power of divine grace to bring thee to faith also and to repentance therefore seeing Gods Word is the only meanes to worke faith waite daily at his Gates and give attendance at the posts of his doores and doe not prescribe unto him or say with Joram Shall I wait upon the Lord any longer though it be longere he calls thee yet it may goe never a whit the worse with thee for that for sometimes it falleth out that the last are first and the first last and the commendation that Austin makes of the Theef's faith upon the Crosse is remarkeable De orig animae lib. 1. cap. 9. Tanto pondere appensum est tantumque valuit ap ud eum qui haec novit appendere quod confessus est dominum crucifixum quantum si fuisset pro Domino crucifixus Tunc enim fides ejus de ligno floruit quando discipulorum marcuit nisi cujus mortis terrore marcuerunt ejus resurrectione reviresceret Illi enim desperaverunt de moriente ille speravit in commorientem Refugerunt illi authorem vitae rogavit ille consortem poenae Doluerunt illi tanquam homines mortem credidit ille regnaturum esse post mortem Deseruerunt illi sponsorem salutis honoravit ille socium crucis Inventa est in eo mensura Martyris qui tunc in Christum credidit quando defecerunt qui futuri erant Martyres 2. From the Comedy I come to the Tragedy I meane the story of Spira Sleidan saith of him that Incredibili ardore caepit complecti puriorem doctrinam cum indies magis magisque proficeret non domi tantum apud amicos quid sentiret de singulis dogmatis verum etiam passim apud omnes explicabat Tidings hereof coming to the Popes Legat then at Venice John Casa Arch-Bishop of Beneventum he convents Spira who confesseth his errour before him intreats pardon and promiseth obedience for time to come The Legat not contented with this commands him to goe home and publiquely to revoke his errour Sleidan writes no more here of but this Accipit ille conditionem licet etiam tum inciperet ipsum paenitere facti tamen urgentibus amicis qui non ipsius modo sed conjugis etiam liberorum facultatum ipsius spem totam in eo positam dicerent obtemperavit Osiander writes that pessimo consilio obsecutus abnegando veritatem caelestem perrexit eamque publice ut haeresin blasphemavit abjuravit The distresse of conscience which overtooke him hereupon is notorious the issue whereof was to end his woefull dayes more woefully in despaire But nothing more strange then his discourses and meditations in the midst of this his desperate condition As for the particulars following 1 Touching the greatnesse of his sinne and that he was taken off from that by the example of Peter I find no such thing neither in Sleidan nor Osiander nor in Goulartius but rather in this latter who makes the largest relation thereof taken out of the discourse of one Henry Scringer a learned Lawyer who was then at Padua who did see and many times talke with this poore Spira I find that which makes to the contrary namely that the sinne which he laid to his owne charge was the sinne against the Holy Ghost And no example I trust neither of Peter nor any other was sufficient to take him off from despaire in such a case 2. And as for the discourse here suggested of his absolute reprobation which he opposed against their comforts ministred unto him no mention thereof neither in Sleidan nor in Osiander nay Osiander writes that he was wish'd to revoke doctrinam Lutheranam and this was it which he did as he sayeth blaspheme as an heresy and abjure Goulartius indeed relates how he conceived himselfe to be reprobated of God as justly he might in case he judged himselfe to have sinned against the Holy Ghost And as for that which is here set down in Latin of him that is a Reprobate namely that necessario condemnabitur though his sins be small few that nihil interest multa an pauca magna an parva sint quando nec Dei misericordia nec Christi sanguis quicquam ad eos pertinet Neither Sleidan nor Osiander nor Goulartius makes any mention of it And therefore I wonder not that he neither followeth Sleidan nor Osiander much lesse that he followes not Goulartius He cites Caelius secundus and Calvin as his Authours and some others that wrot thereof to their friends but names them not as neither where it is that Caelius secundus makes mention of it or in what booke of Calvin it is found I imagined it might be in his Epistles I have spent some houres in searching therein from the yeare 1545 to the yeare 1663 and can find nothing concerning it Now Goulartius wrote since Caelius secundus and Calvin and Sleidan and his relation is large and it semes he inquired in to it somewhat better then they that went before him And thus he relates it out of the discourse of Henry Scringer a Lawyer of Padua who saw Spira at that time and divers times spake with him In a small towne of the territory of Padua called Civitelle there was a Learned Lawyer and advocat a wise and very rich man and an honourable father of a family called Francis Spira who having sayd and done divers things against his conscience to maintaine himselfe and his charge observe by the way he delivers the cause only in generall concealing the speciality it being so strang a testimony and evidence against the Romish Religion being returned to his house he could never rest an houre not a minut nor have any ease of his continuall anguish And even from that night he was so terrified and had such horrour of his actions as he held himselfe for lost For as he himselfe did afterward confesse he did set plainely before his eyes all the torments all the paines of the damned and in his soule did heare the fearfull sentences being drawne before the judgment seat of Jesus Christ a fearfull example to all Apostates The next day and so following he was not seene to resume any courage but his spirits were strangely troubled and the terrour tooke from him all rest and appetite This accident was so greivous to his friends as some repented them much that they had beene the cause of so great an inconvenience by their intreaties Others thinking it did proceed from some cholerick or melancholy humour were of opinion to send him to Padova to be Physicked by the Learned Physitians revived by honorable company and setled by the coference of Learned men there to some of which he was well knowne His Wife and Children with some of his familiar friends did accompany him and he was lodged in one of the chiefe houses Frisimilega Bellocat and Crassus famous Physitians did visit him and give him Physicke with singular
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
such words as might give offence to tender eares and could not well downe with those who are uncapable of such mysteries For all this the Authour quotes AntidotuÌ„ RemonstrantiuÌ„ pag 32 this booke I have not seen much lesse have I it at this time in my possession and therefore I must take it all upon trust And seeing this man was declared in the Synod of Dort as this Authour writes to be pure and Orthodox it seemes they did not censure these speeches of his as unsavorie speeches but rather justified them though with acknowledgment that they might give offence to tender eares and could not well downe with those who were as yet uncapable of such mysteries so that this Authour censureth these speeches of Maccovius for unsavory speeches without the least disproofe of them yet is Maccovius and then was a Professor of Divinity in the University of Franekar In like sort by consequent he censureth the judgment of the Synod as an unsavory judgment and their approbation of Maccovius as an unsavory approbation Let the Reader judge of what Spirit this Authour is and whether it may not be said of him as Moses said of Corah and his complices ye take to much upon you ye Sonnes of Aaron Nay what if this censure of his reflects upon the very Phrases of the Holy Ghost The two first phrases namely to will sinnes and to ordaine men to sinne are all one For to ordaine men to sinne is but to will that such men shall sinne or that there shall be such sinnes of men Now the Scripture frequently justifies this for the 10 Kings to give their Kingdomes to the Beast what is the meaning of it But to imploy their Regall power in supporting the Pope-dome Now was not this a great sinne Yet the Scripture expresly professeth that is was the will of God it should be so Rev 17. 17. For God hath put in their hearts to fullfill his will and to doe it with one consent for to give their Kingdome to the Beast untill the words of God be fulfilled As expresly doth Saint Peter testifie of some men that they are ordained to stumble at God's word and to be disobedient Christ is a stone to stumble at a Rock of offence even to them which stumble at the word being disobedient unto the which thing they were even ordained and by whom could they be ordained hereunto but by God In like sort we know the abominable Outrages committed by Herod Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israel against the Holy Sonne of God for Iudas betraied him the high Priests suborned witnesses against him Herod with his Herodians despitefully used him Pilate condemned him the Romane Souldiers scourged him spit in his face buffeted him arraied him like a King in scorne and crowned him with a Crowne of thornes and last of all Crucified him between two theeves yet of all these the Holy Ghost testifies That in this doing against the Holy Sonne of God they did what God had determined to be done The words of the Text are these and that as delivered with one accord by the Apostles and their fellowes for when Peter and Iohn were let goe they came to their fellowes and shewed all that the High Priests had said unto them And when they heard it they lift up their voices to God with one accord and said O Lord thou art the God which hath made Heaven and earth the sea and all things that are therein which by the mouth of thy servant David hast said why did the Gentiles rage and the people imagine a vaine thing The Kings of the earth assembled and the Rulers came together against the Lord and against his Christ for doubtlesse against thy Holy Son Iesus whom thou hast anointed both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the people of Israell gathered themselves together to doe whatsoever thine hand and thy Counsell had determined before to be done Now every one knowes that to determine to be done and to ordaine to be done and to will to be done are all one why doth not this Authour censure these speeches for unsavory speeches as well as those of Maccovius Why doth not he expose this Synod of the Apostles and others to the same censure whereunto he exposeth the Synod of Dort Nay can it be avoided but that already he hath done so and that these censureâ— of his must necessarily prove the powring forth of Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost Seeing the speeches are used by the Apostles which he censureth for unsavorie being utteredly Maccovius Is it not apparent that whosoever renounceth those speeches most also renounce the word of God And shall it be a reproach to us that we cannot keep our owne ground unlesse the Holy Ghost keepes his ground and maintaine his owne Diâ—lect to be savorie in spite of the vise aspersions that this Authour or any other of his Spirit doth usually cast upon it not sparing to terme such speeches unsavorie speeches As for the last phrase That God would that all men should be saved this is no Scripture nay it doth imply a man fest Blasphemy namely that God cannot save them It is true the Scripture saith that God willeth that all men should be saved but what is meant by this note of universalities in Scripture let Scripture it selfe be Judge The Pharisees did Tâ—the omne olus as Austine observes not every particular her be to give the Tâ—th thereof but every kind of herbe to give the Tenth thereof so Peter saw in a vessell let downe from Heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not every fower footed beast in particular but all manner of fower footed beasts see Mat 3. 5. It is said all Iudea went forth to Iohn and all the region round about Iordan what can the meaning of this be but that from all parts of Judea and the Region round about Jordan of all sorts some went forth to Iohn not that there was not one man left behind in all Judea and in all the Region round about Jordan And accordingly Saint Austine interpreted this place above 1200 yeares agoe namely that God will that of all sorts some be saved even of Kings and Nobles some though but few of such 1 Cor 1. 27. Now this is not denied either by Maccovius or by any other of our Divines only they deny it to be the will of God that all and every one shall be sayed for if this were his will it would follow first that God is not able to save them which is to deny the first Article of the Creed as Austine in this very particular disputed many hundred yeares agoe Secondly it would follow that God is changed for certainely when he damnes men he hath no will to save them And what is Election Divine is it any other then the will of God ordaining unto salvation Now who dares say that all are Elect Hath not our Saviour expresly told us that even
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
nostrum Dei per praevenientem gratiam nostrum per subsequenteÌ„ liberam voluntatem The good that we doe is both God's worke and ours of God by Grace preventing ours by free will following To this Remigius answers and first he saith Hincmarus discoureseth after such a manner as if a good worke were partly God's worke and partly ours And againe as if the beginning of a good worke were God's but the effect thereof of man's free will although as he Hincmarus doth endeavour to temper this speech of his by the addition of grace not by the fulnesse of it gratiae adjunctione non etiam plenâ—tudine by the adjunction of grace not also by the fulnesse of it So he should have done saith Remigius cum verè totum sit Dei seeing indeed the whole is God's worke As the truth it selfe saith without me ye can do nothing And the Apostle what hast thou that that thou hast not received whence the blessed and glorious Martyr Cyprian hath so defined it saying we must glory in nothing seeing nothing is ours and concludes thus Bonum itaque nostrum totum Dei est quia totum est ex Deo nihil boni nostri nostrum est quia nihil boni nostri est ex nobis Therefore our good workes are holy God's and noe good of ours is ours because it is not of us and to reconcile this seeming contradiction in calling it our good yet denying it to be from us he concludes thus omne bonum nostrum totum Dei est donando totum nostrum est accipiendo Every good thing of ours is wholy God's in as much as he gives it and it becomes ours full and whole for as much as we receive it Fulgentius is plaine for it to lib. 1. ad Monium pag. 6. These whome God foresaw would dye in sinne he decrees should live in endles punishment I may take in Saint Austine and Prosper also who are judged to be the Patrons of he absolute Decree as it is set downe in the Sublapsarian way even they doe many times let fall such speeches as cannot fairely be reconciled with absolute Reprobation I will only cite Prosper for Saint Austine speakes in him he discoursing of some that fall a way à Sanctitate ad immunditiem from holinesse to uncleannesse saith they that fall away from holinesse to uncleannesse lye not under a necessity of perishing because they were not predestinate but therefore they were not predestinate because they were knowne to be such by voluntary praevarication Not long after speaking of the same men he saith Because God foresaw they would perish by their owne free will therefore he did not by any predestination lever them from the children of perdition And againe in his answer to the twelvth objection he hath these words God hath not withdrawne from any man ability to yeeld obedience because he hath not predestinated him but because he foresaw he would fall from obedience therefore he hath not predestinated him They are I confesse the wordes of Fulgentius in the 25 chapter of his first booke ad Monium and in the very next chapter he doth expresse himselfe in this manner on the point of predestination unto glory praedestinavit illos ad snpplicium quos à se praescivit voluntatis malae vitio decessuros praedestinavit ad regnum quos ad se praescivit misericordiae praevenientis auxilio redituros in se misericordiae subsequentis auxilio mansuros He predestinateth those untopunishment whom he foresaw to be such as would depart from him through the fault of a naughty will and he predestinated to the kingdome those whom he foresaw to be such as would returne unto him by the help of mercy prevenient and would persevere in him by the helpe of grace subsequent So that upon the same ground he may as well deny predestination unto salvation to be absolute in the opinion of Fulgentius as predestination unto damnation Now Vossius in his preface to the Pelagian Historie having first confessed that all Antients agreed in this That God did not ordaine any other unto eternall salvation then such who by his mere gift of grace should have the beginning of faith and good will and persevere in that which is good as it was foreseen by him In the next place acknowledgeth that Austine and Prosper and the Authour of the booke de vocatione Gentium and Fulgentius unto this common opinion of Catholiques did adde this That this praescience Divine did flow from God's absolute Decree to save them This I say Vossius writes though I see no cause to regard his judgment in this Argument His distinction is very well knowne of will absolute and will conditionall which will conditionate he examplifies thus as when God will have salvavation conferred upon a man in case he doth believe what one of our Divines doth deny a conditionall will in this sense in reference to salvation Now what one of the Antients the Pelagians excepted can this Authour produce that doth affirme any such will to be in God for the bestowing of faith upon a man For to maintaine this were in plaine Termes to maintaine that it was the will of God that grace should bestowed according unto workes But if the grace of God be bestowed merely according to the good pleasure of God as Saint Paule saith God hath mercy on whom he will By this it is aparent that this decree is absolute and consequently that predestination is absolute And thus Austine coupleth together the doctrine of the bestowing grace not according unto workes And his Doctrine of predestination as inseparable each to be granted or denied together with the other Because this Authour pretends it to be needles to cite Austine and sufficient to cite Prosper adding that Austine speakes in him to wit after he was Dead such is this Authours jugling course with his Reader therefore I will represent Austine himselfe proposing the objection made by the Massilienses against Austin's doctrine of predestination as it was sent unto him by Prosper and then answering it not leaving it unto Prosper to answer for him See the objection sed aiunt ut scribitis neminem posse correptionis stimulis excitari si dicatur in conventu Ecelesiae audientibus multis It a se habet de praedestinatione definita sententia voluntatis Dei ut alii ex vobis de infidelitate accepta obediendi voluntate veneritis ad fidem vel accepta perseverantia maneatis in fide c. But they say as ye write that none can be stirred up by the Goad of correption if it be said in the Congregation in the hearing of many such as touching predestination is the determinate sentence of the will of God that some of you receiving an obedient will shall come from infidelitie unto faith or receiving perseverance shall continue in the faith But the rest who continue in sinfull delights therefore you have not risen because the succour of
preparatur Reprobatis in quantum scil Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata quae à se ipsis habent non à Deo The foresight of sinnes may be some reason of reprobation as touching the punishment which is prepared for Reprobates in asmuch as God decreeth to punish wicked men for their sinnes which they have of themselves not of God But of reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating there can be noe more cause thereof then there can be a cause of God's will as touching the act of God willing And upon this very ground it is that Aquinas professeth that * never any man was so mad as to affirme that there may be a cause given of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating Let us therefore forbeare to impute any such opinion to Prosper or any other of the Antients which none ever was so mad as to maintaine in the judgment of Aquinas The same answer will serve for the next derived out of the same place in Prosper As for the third of withdrawing strength of obedience This indeed was objected unto Austine as if in his opinion God did so wheras I have shewed also how Austine signifies that he had nothing to doe with that and therefore he leaves that quite out And indeed Austin's is cleare and expresse that as many as God hath not predestinated those he never bring 's unto wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby a man is reconciled unto God in Christ Cont Iulian Pelag lib. 5. cap. 4. And consequently he never brings them to any true obedience The whole sentence in Prosper hath no more moment then the former and therefore admits the same answer A testimony or two I will borrow likewise from some person of note and those Saint Austin's followers too who lived about 400 yeares after Saint Austin's time Remigius the great Patron of Gotteschalke the zeatous preacher and publisher of absolute reprobation in those times in his answer to that epistle which we suppose to be the Epistle of Rabanus saying that God did make the nations of the world and that he doth will that all men should be saved he gives such an answer as cannot stand with absolute reprobation This saith he is very true because God layeth on noe man a necessity of perishing as he hath laid on none a necessity of sinning And a little after he is plainer Those whom God did fore know would live and dye in their wickednesses for reasons most just should perish as himselfe saith Him that sinneth against me even him will I blot out of my Booke In the Valantine Synod assembled in the favour of Gotteschalke we may find these words Therefore doe the wicked perish not because they could not but would not be good and by their owne fault originall or actuall also remained in the Masse of perdition And in the end of their 3. Cannon they pronounced Anathema to those that hold that men are so predestinated unto evill as they cannot be otherwise That any should be saith the Councell predestinated unto evill by the power of God so as he cannot be otherwise we doe not only not believe but also if there be any that will believe so great an evill with all detestation we denounce them accursed as the Councell also did This Authour grants Remigius to be a Patron of absolute reprobation But these words of his this Authour saith cannot stand with absolute Reprobation Remigius undoubtedly thought they could otherwise he must have renounced the Doctrine of absolute reprobation and the Patronage thereof which yet he did not as this Authour acknoledgeth Now is it enough for this Authour to say that these words cannot stand with absolute Reprobation and barely to say it without proving ought and truely I have found such to be the imperious carriage of this Authour in manuscript now I see it in print But let us endeavour to cleare Remigius by proving the Contrary indevour to cleare Remigius by proving the contrary Therefore it is well knowne that the Terme absolute stand's in opposition to Conditionall Now this distinction of will absolute and will Conditionall Gerardus Vossius doth accommodate in respect of the things willed of God and gives instance of God's will of saving which he saith is conditionall forasmuch as God purposeth not to bestow salvation on any but such as believe faith being by God's ordinance the Condition of obtaining Salvation In like sort Doctor Iackson in his book of Providence acknowledgeth the distinction of voluntas antecedens and consequens is to be understood not on the part of God willing but on the part of things willed Now the things willed in the decree of Reprobation are two contrary to things willed in Election For as in Election God doth will the conferring of grace and the conferring of salvation soe in Reprobation God doth will the deniall of grace and inflicting of damnation Now Remigius in the passages here produced speakes altogether of God's will to inflict damnation and he denies that God's will is to inflict damnation on any man absolutely but only conditionally to wit in case of finall perseverance in sinne and so say we with Remigius But as touching God's will to deny grace we utterly deny that God will have grace to be denied upon a condition for nothing can be devised to be the condition thereof but sinne either originall or actuall And if upon such a condition grace should be denied it should be denied to all seeing before grace is given all are found to be under sinne actuall or originall and consequently all should be Reprobates even every mothers sonne 2. And if to avoid this it be said although all be sinners yet grace is denyed to none but such as want a certaine particular obedience Then upon the performing of that obedience grace should be conferred this is as much as to say that Grace is conferred according unto workes which doctrine hath ever been abominated by the Orthodox in opposition unto the Pelagians Now the Apostle clearely makes for us in this professing that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth Now though there passages produced out of Remigius carrie some shew against absolute reprobation from glorie or unto damnation yet have they noe colour or shew of opposing absolute reprobation from grace As for necessitie of perishing that is merely conditionall to wit in case of finall continuance in sinne without repentance And as for necessitie of sinning that we confesse is found in all in state of nature Corvinus confesseth it to be the doctrine of Arminius that all men naturally are cast upon a necessitie of sinning And Doctor Potter proposeth it as the doctrine of the Church of England that in a naturall man there is no libertas a peccato libertie from sinning which yet is to be understood aright not but that it is in his power to abstaine from any particular sinfull act for
of them upon any particular But I noe way thinke fit to entertaine a conferrence here about by wordes of mouth but rather by writing so it will be more quietly carried so it will be more free from aliene discourse so each party shall have time both duely to weigh the Adversaries Argument and with due consideration to put in his answer thereunto And is it not farre more decent that the holy things of God should be handled premeditately rather then subitaneously Fistly what if Beza were of opinion that God hath chosen some unto eternall life and passed by others without any respect had to the personall goodnesse of the one or naughtinesse of the other and that this is Saint Paule's doctrine Rom 9. This was Saint Austin's opinion also as Vossius acknowledgeth in his historie of Pelagian heresies p. 655. Now will any man thinke him well in his wits who discourseth after this manner surely Austin's doctrine concerning election and reprobation is suspectable of untruth Because Beza maintaining the same doctrine some 1200 yeares after was unwilling to come to a tryall thereabouts at a certaine time in a certaine place namely at Mompelgard before the Duke of Wirtenberg Lastly observe the strange inconsiderations of this Authour for the Authour of the former discourse promised the Gentleman his friend to whom he wrote to give him the reason of his change in opinion not in this point only of reprobation but in the other points also for he perceived he was become an Arminian Now whereas he gives him the reason of his change in one point only declining all the rest doth he not manifest his unwillingnesse to deale on all the other 4 points And may not wee conclude after this Authours manner that this betrayes no small suspicion that certainely his cause is weak and ill grounded in all the rest In like manner doth this Achates carry himselfe he that helps of the other to make his taske for him It is his usuall course to deale only upon the point of reprobation as in this place so in a writing of his to a certaine Scholer and as I have seen under his hand It seemes he is well conceited of his sufficiencie on this point And truely I am very glad to see what he can say for himselfe even on the point of reprobation That which followes is to little purpose save to shew the plerofphorie of his common place-place-book and how easily it is for him to abound not only in things necessary but in things unnecessary also Therefore he tells us what Cicero writes of Epicurus which may with a farre better grace be retorted upon himselfe then upon Beza or the Contra-Remonstrants at the Hague conferrence or the Fathers of Dort how unfacetiously it is applyed unto them I have already shewed and further it is well knowne both by Calvins and Beza's writings and by that which was done in the Synod of Dort set forth to the veiwe of all the world that they have not concealed their opinions from the world on those points controverted All that are able to read and understand Latine may soone come accquainted with them And M. Hord dealing only upon reprobation which is but a part of one of the five Articles and forbearing to meddle with Election or any other of the five contrary to the promise made by him unto his friend doth he not hereby bewray consciousnesse of his owne insufficiencie to meddle thereon And like enough he hath learned this wisedome from his Abettor and this is his course who loves to deale in hugger mugger and sets others on worke contented to blowe the coales yet walkes gloriously at the light of his owne fire and the sparkes that he hath kindled vaunting as I heare that his peece cannot be answered and in such termes he commends it unto the Country In like manner let the indifferent Reader judge whether that which he produceth out of Lodovicus Vives be more against us then against the Authour himselfe that produceth it for both Calvin and Beza and generally our Divines have publiquely professed their opinions not on predestination only but on reprobation also and upon all other points controverted between us and the Arminians whereas this Auhour sculkes and pulls in his hornes as if he dared not to be seen on other points only declares himselfe upon the point of reprobation I meane M. Horde but as for the other which blowes quick-silver into him he is loath to be knowne as if his occupation were with Brontesque Steropesque nudus membra Pyracmon to take paines to make thunder-bolts for Iupiter or for Mercury rather for he is content an other should be the chiefe speaker 5ly The Iew he saith is loath to reason with the Christian touching his law and the Turke is forbidden to speak of his Alcoran But have I shewed my selfe loath to reason with this Brontes in any particular difference between us or with any among'st them that weares a head upon his shoulders I trust I never shall as long as I breath As for this Authour the world is witnesse how deeply guilty he is in this kind contrary to his owne promise But he may thanke his prompter that he deales in this and he indeed had made noe such promise to to confine him but out of his fox-like carriage makes choise to deale only on this where he hopes to meet with a favourable winde from vulgar and popular conceits to to fill his failes to carry him prosperously into their affections be his Arguments never so weak never so insipid Now it is well knowne unto him that my answer to the former discourse hath now been in the the hands of others for the space of two yeares and a halfe and not the smallest passage thereof doe I find answered here And this seconds conscience knoweth whether he hath not been full well acquainted with it before this peece of his did see the light of the presse Now because this alone might justly prove notoriously prejudiciall to the whole see what a dog-trick hath been played to antedate the edition thereof as if it were printed Anno 1633 when it hath been but a few monthes since this hath been knowne unto the world that the Reader may imagine if it please him that this was printed before my answere was returned to the former discourse And to what purpose is the discourse brought to the Bulke which that hath at present so many odde things being inserted thereunto but to provide for their indemnitie that shall say This was never it answered whereat I wounder not a little namely at the cunning and crafty carriage of this second who for good reason may be accompted the first in asmuch as he useth the other but as a stalking-horse to promote his owne game I say I may and doe wounder not a little at this for he both carrieth himselfe and others boast of him as if he were some formidable Creature and Lyon like to affright all
others that should deale with him when in very truth all his performances savour farre more of the Fox then of the Lyon And it is also disstastfull to all the Greek Churches Moulin in his Anotomy speaking of the Supralapsarian doctrine saith if it should be so that God hath reprobated men without the consideration of sinne or hath ordained them to sinne Yet it is the part of a wise man to conceale these things or not to know them rather then to utter them because when they are taught and defended they fill mens heads with sceuples and give occasion to the adversaries to the defaming the true religion The same may as truely be said of the Sublapsarian way for as I have said they are in substance all one And Sir Edwin Sandes is of the same mind too for in his most excellent booke caled A survay of the State of Religion in the westerne part of the world speaking of the deadly division between the Luthernas and the Calvinists in Germany he hath these wordes that though â—he Palsgrave and Lansgrave have with great judgment and wisedome to slake those flames imposed silence in that part to the Ministers of their party hoping the Charitie and discretion of the other party would have done the like yet it falls out otherwise for both the Lutheran Preachers raile as bitterly against them in their pulpits as ever and their Princes and people have them in as greate detestation not forbearing to professe openly that they will returne to the Papacie rather then ever admit that Sacrementary and predestinary Pestilence And as for the Grecians we learne also by Sir Edwin Sandes his relation that they doe mightilie dissent from the doctrines touching the eternall Counsells of God which Calvin as some conceive first fully revealed or rather introduced into the Christian world and some of his friends and followers have seconded as thinking it very injurious to the goodnesse of God and directly immediatly opposite to his very nature In regard of which on of their Byshops hath written a booke against it which hath been sent to Geneva and there received And to say on thing more besides this infamy among Christians it is very probable that among the too many scandals given to the Jewes by Christians among whom they dwell This doctrine is not on of the least rubs in the way of their conversion For they thinke it a bad opinion saith the same judicious and learned Gentleman which some of great name have seemed to hold that God in his everlasting and absolute pleasure should affect the extreame miserie of any of his Creatures for the shewing of his justice and severitie in tormenting them or that the calamitie casting a way and damnation of some should absolutely and necessarily redound more to his glorie then the felicitie of them all considering that his nature is mere goodnesse and happinesse and hath noe affinity with rigour and misery And secondly the determination of the end doth necessarily involve the meanes that preceeds the end as if a man before determined to damnation he must unavoidably sinne else he could not be damned As touching this paticular of M. Moulyn I have addressed an answer puctually thereunto in my Vindiciae amongst my degressions touching predestination yet I am content to say something concerning the point it selfe and his judgment thereupon Reprobation hath two parts which this Authour most judiciously confounds the one is God's decree to deny grace the other is his decree to inflict damnation As touching the first the very execution thereof proceeds merely according to God's pleasure howmuch more the decree it selfe which is eternall and cannot possibly have any precedaneous thereunto whereas the execution is temporall and temporall things may have somewhat precedaneous thereunto Now that the execution thereof is merely according to God's good pleasure is apparent the execution thereof being no other then the denyall of grace And as God of his mere pleasure gives faith and repentance to whom he will so of his mere pleasure he denies it unto others otherwise grace should be conferred according unto workes which was condemned in the Synod of Palestine Pelagius himselfe subscribing thereunto above 1200 yeares agoe and all along afterwards it was condemned in divers Synods gatherd together for suppressing of the Pelagian Heresie Now did M. Moulin think it noe wise part to publish this doctrine That grace is not given according unto workes but according to the mere pleasure of God Nothing lesse Saint Paul plainly professing that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth Come we to reprobation as it signifies God's decree to inflict damnation without consideration of sinne our adversaries would faine shape our opinions thus and none more eager this way then this Authour I meane him that is thought to be the suggester at first and since the Interpolator and Promotor of all this But this is a most notorious untruth nay how can we maintaine this who imbrace the definition of reprobation given by Aquinas where he saith that repobation includes a will to permit sinne and to inferre damnation for sinne so doth M. Perkins and him have I justified against Arminius in my Vindiciae And not any one of our Divines doth maintaine that God intends to damne any man but for sinne and finall perseverance therein without repentance And the former point concerning the first act of reprobation being granted which neither Sir Edwin Sandes nor any Lutheran that I know denies the doctrine concerning this latter act of reprobation will be found to containe noe difficultie at all forasmuch as we utterly deny that God either doth inflict or ever did decree to inflict damnation according to his mere pleasure but merely for finall continuance in sinne without repentance Now let every sober Reader consider whether there be any harshnesse in all this But as M. Moulin discourseth here so did the Massilienses of old concerning Austin's doctrine as which they would not have at all broached as appeares in the Epistle of Prosper Yet I commend this Authour for his ingenuous confession that the same may be said of the Sublapsarian way But to our prejudice he tells us that Sir Ed Sandes is of the same mind and therefore considering the excellencie of the booke written by him whereunto we may adde the excellencie of the discourse written by this Authour let us for the credit and transcendent sufficiencie of these two renounce not Calvin and Beza only poore Snakes as they were but the whole Synod of Dort and all the outlandish divines assembled there and manifesting their concurrance in opinion with those Synodicall Divines yea and Fulke and Whitaker and the Universitie of Cambridge as they were then affected when they drave Barret to a recantation Yet Sir Edwin Sandes in the place produced betraies not his owne judgment but makes relation of the bitternesse of Lutherans in opposing Calvinists In like manner both
the Gospell as appeareth by the objection following Why then doth he complaine For who hath resisted his will And albeit the Saints of God expostulate with him in this manner Why hast thou caused us to erre from thy wayes and hardened our hearts against thy feare Yet we know that God takes no pleasure in disobedience or in the hardnesse of any mans heart nor can be the Authour of evill with Sir Francis Bacons distinction in the booke formerly mentioned by this Authour Non quià non Author sed quià non mali So that albeit he hardens whom he will unto disobedience in the prophet Esayes phrase causeth men to erre from his wayes Yet the Lord himselfe we know is righteous in all his wayes holy in all his workes though we are not able to dive into the gulfe and search out the bottome of his judgments and no marvaile For they are unsearchable Yet we make no question but through Gods mercy convenient satisfaction may be found without any such shaÌ„efull course of dismeÌ„bring scripture and taking notice only of such passages as represent Gods displeasure against sin sinners and dissembling all other passages which drave Austin to confesse occulto Dei judicio by the secret judgement of God fieri perversitatem cordis the perversity of mans heart hath its course much lesse by setting theÌ„ together by the eares And I nothing doubt but the issue will be on the part of such as are of this Authours spirit either wholly to deny originall sin or so to emasculate the vigor of it as to professe that it is in the power of maÌ„ to cure it or notwithstaÌ„ding the strength of it to beleive repeÌ„t if he will which though they preteÌ„d to be wrought by a certain universal grace Yet I nothing doubt but we shall be able to prove that such a power is mere nature and no grace Be it so that wicked men in their wicked courses do chose the things that God would not Who would thinke that this Author who makes such a florish should content himselfe with such beggarly arguments or that the world should be so simple as to be terrifyed with such scar-crowes For is it not apparent that in scripture phrase there is voluntas praecepti a will of commandement as well as voluntas propositi a will signifying Gods purpose and decree So theÌ„ though they chuse the things that God willed not in reference to his will of commandement yet it might be Gods will that is his purpose that even such sinnes should come to passe For was it not the will of God that Pharaoh should not let Israel goe for a while Did he not harden him to this purpose that so he might make himselfe knowne in the land of Egypt by his judgemeÌ„ts did he not reveale this to Moses to the coÌ„fort of the childreÌ„ of Israel keepe theÌ„ from despaire in conteÌ„plation of the obstinacy of Pharaoh's spirit when they were assured that God had an haÌ„d in hardening Pharaoh to staÌ„d out And doth not Bellarmine professe that maluÌ„ fieri permitt sin Deo bonuÌ„ est it is good that evill should coÌ„ to passe by Gods permission And shall it be unbecoÌ„ing the divine nature to will that which is good And where is it that Bellarmine affirmeth this even there where he opposeth the same Doctrine of ours which this Authour doth but with more learning an 100 fold then this Authour betrayeth and withall carryeth himselfe with farre more ingenuity For he takes notice of those places of Scripture whereupon our Divines do build and accommodates himselfe to aswer them by some intepretation that he thinks good to make of them which this Authour doth not 2. But what if there be no such text as this Authour builds upon For looke what the word is used in the originall Ps 5. 4. the same is used Es 66 4 Now that in Ps 5. 4 This Authour renders not that wouldest not iniquity but that hast no pleasure in iniquity And why then shall not that Es 66. 4. be accordingly rendred thus They choose the things wherein I had no pleasure or wherein I had no delight and not as he expresseth it the things that I would not Hereupon I imagined our Enlish tranlation had thus rendred it but consulting that I found the contrary For thus they render it They choose the things wherein I delighted not It is true the Geneva renders it thus But doth it become him to preferre and follow the Geneva translation before the last and most authenticall translation of the Church of England In like manner the practise of Geneva must be of authority to cry us downe in the point of the morality of the fourth commandement Were not the man well knowne to be sound at heart his favourites might well suspect him to praevaricate in making so great a cry and yet yeilding so little wooll In the next place he alleadgeth that of Iames. Let no man say when he is tempted that he is temptedof God For God tempteth no man But every man is tempted when he is drawen away with his owne concupiscence Now Peter Martyr on the first to the Romans deales at large upon this place and disputes strangely indiscoursing of Gods providence in evill I would this Authour had taken the paines to answer him at least that he might performe somewhat tanto dignum hiatu worthy of the great gaping he makes It is true Bellarmine hath taken him to taske after a sort in his eigth chapter of his second book de Amiss gratiae statu peccati And I have replyed upon Bellarmine at large in my Vindiciae in that large digression wherein I take Bellarmine to taske in that book of his whereunto I referre the Reader Yet to say somewhat of this place befor I passe It is apparent that the Apostle in this place doth not so put off from God the workes of tempting as to cast it upon Satan but onely so as to shew that whatsoever the divine providence is there about either by the ministry of Satan who is God's minister in hardening men to precipâ—tate courses I Kings the last or otherwise yet still the sinner is unexcusable for as much as he is then only tempted effectually For so it is to be understood otherwise it were not true as it appeares in the case of Joseph tempted by his Mistris when he is drawen away by his own concupiscence It is true the lust of the flesh the lust of the eyes and pride of life is not of the Father but of the world they are the members of that body of sin which we brought with us into the world This is propagated unto us all by naturall generation Holy Iacob the Son of holy Isaak a Patriach of holy Rebeccah a Prophetesse was borne in sin as well as Esau and Seth as well as Cain and this seemeth to be called the image of Adam
as I have shewed in my Vinaiciae For Peter Lombard disputing on either side about this concurrence leaves it indifferent to the Reader to imbrace either part Either the affirmative that God doth concurre to every act though it be sinfull or the negative Yet I say as many as doe maintaine the affirmative doe so maintaine God's motion upon the creatures will as to move it only agreably unto it's nature namely to work freely not necessarily Like as he moves necessary Agents to work necessarily and contingent Agents to worke contingently And if this Authour be ignorant hereof which may well give him boldnes For who so bold as blind Bayard What doth he other in all this but betray his own shame comming to discourse on such an argument as an asse comes to play upon an harp as the proverbe speaks But if he be not ignorant of this what unshamefastnesse doth he manifest all along making bold only upon the simplicity and ignorance of his Reader to gull him and abuse him and draw him along to oppose the free grace of God in predestination and regeneration under colour of making God the Authour of sinne in the point of reprobation which yet he despaires of making good against us without notorious untruths and that undoubtedly delivered against his own knowledge For what Authour hath he produced to justifie this that any of our Divines maintaines that God necessitates the will of man to sin Not any that I know using this phrase Necessitate but Papists and among'st them none that I know but Bradwardine a man renowned in his time both for eminent learning and eminent piety as appeares by Sir Henry Savill's preface unto that book of his and he no where affirming that God necessitates any man unto sinne but only to the substance of the act that not so as to make the will work necessarily as the phrase imports in a vulgar eare and unto a popular judgment whereupon alone this Author takes his advantage most unconscionably but agreably to ' its nature that is contingently and freely For were he able to produce any one of our Divines that affirmeth this why doth he not Is there anyâ—hing throughout this whole discourse that more requires he should name the man and quote the places where this is affirmed then this Yet here we find a blank he carrieth it on magnificently upon his own bare word which deserves no credit at our hands And is it possible to believe so foule a crimination without all evidence produced unlesse faction and partiallity hath blinded his eyes Should he have laied to our charge that we maintaine that God necessitates the will to any good act and to overrule the will therein we should utterly deny it without distinction It is true he overrules the will of the flesh but not the will of the Spirit the regenerate part but moves it agreably to ' its nature and to worke not only voluntarily but freely whatsoever it worketh For albeit the regenerate part is like a morall vertue though as much transcendent to it as a thing supernaturall transcends a thing naturall inclining only to that which is good yet is it alwaies moved to this particular good rather then unto an other most freely Like as a man's naturall corruption inclines a man only to evill yet to this kind of evill or to this particular evill rather then to that Man is moved most freely So that if we maintaine not that God workes a man to every good act otherwise then freely let the very conscience of our enemies judge whether we can maintaine that God necessitates the will either of men or of Devills unto sinne For it is apparent that God hath a Double influence unto a good act One unto it as unto an act and that is influence generall Another unto it as unto a good and gracious act and that we acknowledge to be an influence speciall and supernaturall But as touching an evill act all sides confesse that God hath but a single influence thereunto and that generall namely as it is an act not as it is evill And albeit this influence which we call concurrence unto the act be joyned with an influence into the will of the creature to move it to the producing of the same act yet this motion is no other theÌ„ whereby the will is moved to worke agreably to ' its nature that is freely Like as all other Agents are moved by God the first Agents to worke agreably to their natures necessary things to worke necessarily contingent things contingently So that in all this there is no overruling of the will no liberty taken from her but rather she is maintained and established in her free condition and moved agreably thereunto like as in the eleaventh Article of Ireland it is expressed For after it is laid downe that God from all eternity did by his unchangable counsell ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe It is forthwith added that hereby no violence us offered to the wills of the reasonable creatures and neither the liberty nor the contingency of the second causes is taken away but established rather But because of another claw that here is subjoyned by this Authour it is to be considered that the liberty of the creature is not equall unto the liberty of the Creator God himselfe But like as all other causes are but second causes God alone the prime cause All other Agents but second Agents God alone the first Agent So likewise all other free Agents are but second free Agents God alone primum liberum the first free Agent So that no liberty of the creature doth or can exempt it from the Agency of God In whom we live and move and have our being what a proud thing presumptuous were it for the creature to aspire unto such an exemption Who oppose us in the point of free will more then Papists Yet see how Alvarez disputes against this vise and presumptuous conceit so much maintained by the Jesuites and after taken up by the Arminians who live by their scraps as if they would be content to wash their dishes The Jesuites discourse thus That the will may be free she must have the Dominion of her act true saith Alvarez debet habere Dominium sui actûs non tamen oportet quod habeat primum absolutum Dominium sui actus she must have the dominion overher act but not the first and absolute deminion of her act And Disput 117 he proposeth this question Whether the will hath her dominion of her act and what dominion this is In the resolution whereof he proposeth three conclusions 1. The free will of man hath the dominion of her act as the next cause thereof In this conclusion the Divines on both sides doe concurre 2. Free will created in the actuall use of Dominion and power which she hath over her acts depends on God as of an absolute Lord predeliberating and predetermining before the foreknowledge
said to be God's indignation And if God leaves any man to his corruption and offers occasions and temptations from without which are naturally apt to actuate such corruptions and withall gives them over to the power of Satan what is to be expected but that they will breake forth into murther as in Senacherib's sons and the Jewes crucifying the Son of God into stealth sacrilegious as in Achan into adultery and that in an incestuous manner as we see in Absalom into insurrections an example whereof we have in the ten Tribes revolting from Rehoboam into treasons as Iudas betraying his own Master and into all manner of outragious villanies whereof the Scripture makes plentifull mention and of the providence of God therein As for God's determining to the act that is nothing at all materiall to the point in hand though this Authour in his crude conceits is much intoxicated therewith For as much as whether the wicked are exercised in actions good for the substance of them or in abstaining from that which is evill they never a whit the more either performe the one or abstaine from the other in a gracious manner and all for want of grace supernaturall which God is not bound to bestow on any All sides confesse that Divine concourse is necessary to every act as without which the creature cannot move For in God we move as well as in him we live and in him we have our being And about this concourse a question is made to wit Whether God's influence be only into the act and that upon condition modo nos velimus provided that we will is as absurd and contradictious a conceit as can be devised seing the greatest question is concerning the act of willing And is it possible that God shall worke this act upon condition that it be wrought by us why if it be wrought by us what need is there of God's working it Can the same act be the condition of it selfe and so both before and after it selfe To avoid this precipice others fly to God's prescience that at such an instant man will produce such an act of will provided that God will produce it which is worse then the former For hereby each Agent 's operation is made the condition of the other whence no operation at all can proceed Then againe a thing is fained to be foreseen by God as future which hath no cause of the futurition thereof being in it's own nature merely possible that is no more future indeed then not future And nothing but the will and decree of God can make it passe out of the condition of a thing merely possible into the condition of a thing future as is made manifest by invincible reason Therefore we say the influence of God necessarily required to every action is made into the will it selfe moving it agreably to the nature thereof to doe whatsoever it doth not voluntarily only but freely also taking liberty aright and as it ought to be taken that is in the choice of meanes tending to an end whether that end be a man's right end or no. For it is confessed by Moralists that the motion of the will towards it's congruous end is naturall and necessary not free But this brave Gentleman carrieth himselfe aloft and superciliously despising to enter into any of these lists of argumentation and as if the matter were conclusum contra Manichaeos confidently supposeth without all proofe that we maintaine that all humane actions come to passe by absolute necessity Whereas to the contrary 't is evident that nothing in the world hath it's existence by absolute necessity saving God alone 'T is true God's decree is unalterable and whatsoever comes to passe comes to passe by his will saith Austin and the Church of Ireland By the effectuall will of God saith Aquinas as which he makes the roote of all contingency And therefore as necessary causes worke necessarily by the will of God so by the same will of God doe contingent Agents worke contingently and free Agents worke voluntarily and freely And observe the immodesty of this Authour he tells us what Zeno's servant pleaded for himselfe with his Master but he doth not tell what Zeno answered him that he conceales it is enough for him to gull and cheate poore ignorants The Adrumetine Monks he saith were misled by Austin a vile imputation cast upon that man whose memory hath been alwaies honourable in the Church of God and the memoriall of his opposites rots Did Austin misleade them did he draw them into errour If they did mistake Austin shall it be true therefore to say they were misled by him How many mistake and misunderstand God's word what then shall we be so audacious and blasphemous as to say they are misled by the word of God Why may not such impudent persons proceed and say they are misled by the holy Ghost Then that which he saith of these Monks as misled by Austin it is a notorious untruth Cresconius and Felix that came over to Austin of their own heads to complaine of some in their Monastry laid to their charge indeed that they so taught grace that they denied freewill that this they pretended to have learned out of Austin's booke written to Sixtus the Presbyter But Austin was not hasty to believe this crimination And therefore he saith disjunctively of that Monke of whom they complained Aut librum meum non intelligit aut ipse non intelligitur either he understands not my booke or himselfe is not well understood by his brethren If the information were true then that Brother of whom they complained mistooke Austin For Austin doth not any where so maintaine grace as to deny free-will But if that Brother understood Austin aright in that foresaid booke of his then he maintained no such opinion as Cresconius and Felix laid to his charge but they rather misunderstood him And this appeared to be most true afterwards For Florus was the man whom Cresconius and Felix accused and whom Austin desired of Valentinus the father of them that he would send over unto him as Coccius acknowledgeth accordingly he was sent over to Austin as appeares in Austin's booke De corrept gratiâ cap. 1. With whom when Austin had conferred he found him most orthodoxe as himselfe professeth in the chapter mentioned and therein much rejoyced and withall signifieth to Valentinus that they deserved rather to be checked who misunderstood Florus And therefore when Austin in his Retractations comes to take notice of his booke De gratiâ libero arbitrio and the occasion of writing thereof he sets it downe not absolutely because of those who so doe maintaine grace as withall they deny free-will but with a disjunctive addition thus or because of those who thinke when grace is maintained therewithall that free-will is denied The first was delivered in reference to the crimination made before him by Cresconius and Felix against Florus but the latter was according to Austin's suspicion
thereof and he gives instance in such a necessity as whereby we say It most needs be that such a thing come to passe as no way prejudiciall to man's liberty And Arminius confesseth that upon supposition of God's decree it must needs be that the Souldiers should abstaine from the breaking of Christ's bones yet I nothing doubt but this action was as as freely performed by them as any other For albeit a thing must needs come to passe which God hath decreed to come to passe yet it is indifferent to come to passe necessarily or freely which also God determines according to the nature of the things themselves namely that necessary things shall come to passe necessarily and contingent things contingently And to this purpose he hath prepared different Agents as Aquinas observeth some necessary working necessarily some contingent working contingently 4. Still this Author harpes upon the same string imputing unto us that we make the whole Circle af a man's life a mere destiny his meaning is that we take away all liberty which is most untrue As for destiny it is well knowne as before I have shewed that this was the usuall crimination which the Pelagians cast upon the doctrine of St. Austin and that because he maintained that grace was not given according unto man's workes And what was Austin's answer hereunto I have shewed before Si cui voluntatem omnipotentis Dei Fati nomine placet nuncupari profanas verborum novitates evitamus sed de verbis contendere non amamus If men please to call the will of Almighty God by the name of destiny we avoid profane novelties of words but we doe not love to wrangle about words For God to worke us to faith to repentance to every good worke yea to the very will and the deed and that according to his good pleasure for which we have expresse Scripture both in the old and new Testament as earst I shewed absolutely to decree this is to make the whole circle of man's like as touching good courses but a mere destiny if we believe this Divine whereas if this be decreed to be done conditionally then grace must be conferred according to works which is as true Pelagianisme as ever dropt from the mouth of Pelagius which himselfe was soÌ„etimes driven torenounce yet this Pelagianisme is the only true divinity if we believe this Author Againe if non aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit Not any thing coÌ„es to passe unlesse God Almighty will have it come to passe whether good or evill which was sometimes delivered by Austin and of late professed by the Church of Ireland in the dayes of King James this is to make the whole Circle of man's life a mere Destiny if this Author be of any credit so farre as to make his words to be received as Oracles yet God's word is expresse from the unanimous consent of the Apostles that both Herod Pontius-Pilate wih the Gentiles and people of Israel were gathered together against the holy Son of God to do what God's hand God's counsell had before determined to be done Yet were they gathered together to doe such acts as more facinorous were never known to be done since the world beganne And if we believe this Author all this came to passe by meere destiny And if this be to come to passe by meere destiny why should we not believe it Have we better or more compleate testimony for ought throughout the whole booke of God then for this All things that come to passe must needs be the issues of the divine decree not only such things as come to passe necessarily by necessary Agents working necessarily but even such things also as come to passe freely by free agents working contingently and freely as Aquinas hath proved and Austin and the Church of Ireland acknowledged and the word of God hath justified and cleare reason demonstrated for as much as otherwise no future thing could be foreknowne by God from everlasting For nothing can be from everlasting knowne by God as future unlesse from everlasting it were future But without the decree of God passing upon it no contingent thing can passe out of the condition of a thing merely possible such as it is in it's own nature into the conditioÌ„ of a thing future So that whosoever denies God's decree to passe upon every thing that comes to passe throughout the world must therewithall deny the foreknowledge thereof in the mind of God Let but this Authour avoid this one argument if he can but he will never answer it while his head is hotâ—â— conceive I have had sufficient experience of his strength already this way and of the shamefull issue of his adventure therein He that sayd Non aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit Not any thing comes to passe unlesse the Almighty will have it come to passe sayd also that God so workes in every creature as without all prejudice to their own motions And when the Apostle said that In God we move his meaning was not that the creature did nothing or moved not at all All that followeth is of the same stampe a fardell of unshamefast untruthes Belike when God saith I will cause them to walke in my statutes and to doe them God caused them to doe just nothing In like manner when the holy Prophet expostulates with God in the person of the Church after this manner Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy waies and hardened our hearts against thy feare the meaning is why hast thou caused us to doe just nothing In like manner when God restraines offences he doth it not by his lawes When he promotes vertue he doth it not by rewards when he converts sinners he doth it not by sermons when thousands were converted in one day it was not by the ministry of Peter and his fellow Apostles This Authours meaning seemes to be that unlesse man converts himselfe it is not done by sermons But see how he overlasheth wheÌ„ carrying the matter so as if God's decree necessitated and overruled all by our opinion yet most absurdly he exempts from this divine decree man's endeavours And who seeth not that to overrule is to carry the reasonable creature on to doe contrary to his own will and judgment For unlesse he doth tosse strenuouslly he can prevaile nothing with any sober and indifferent Reader In like sort to necessitate denotes such a motion whereby the creature is carried to doe a thing necessailry but this is not Bradwardines opinion who alone amongst Schoole-Divines that I know useth this phrase of necessitating For he saith that God necessitates the creature to his free act this necessity is but modall according to that expression of Austin necesse est ut aliquid fiat which Austin confessed 1200 years agoe to be no impeachment to man's liberty But because that phrase Necessitating is not only of an harsh sound apt to be taken in a quite contrary
sense to that of the Authour 's therefore other School-Divines and generally our Divines use it not And how immodest a course is this to thinke to choake us with other mens phrases and that in a quite contrary sense to that wherein the Authour 's take it And as if he had very substantially concluded the point that lawes doe nothing rules of religion and mens endeavours do nothing whereas he hath performed no part either of a Philosopher or of a Divine in all this but of a mere trifler he proceeds to demand why the one are made the other prescribed why men are encouraged to some things and scared from the other He might as well aske what meant King Hezechiah to have any care either of his foode or of taking Physicke for those 15 yeares which God told him he had added unto his life What meant Paul to tell the Master of the ship that unlesse the Mariners were detained in the ship they could not be saved what meant some to trust to their swimming others to boards brokempeeces of the ship to get to land when the Lord by his Angell had told him that he had given him the lives of all that sailed with him In the very daies of Cicero the Stoicks were acquainted with such like arguments made against their destiny and knew how readily to answer them by distinguishing between Fatalia and Confatalia as appeares in Cicero's book de Fato and Turnebus his answer to Ramus thereupon more at large Therefore this Authour disputes not logically if he did the vilenesse of his argumentation would soone appeare according to it's proper colours but carrieth the matter all along in Rhetoricall flourishes as if his wit served him for that best whereat I wonder not a little that he should forsake that wherein his facultie lieth most according to the reputation that goes of him trust to that wherein his best dexterity hath been accounted but inficete If our doctrine tends to the subversion of policy religion and lawes society goverment In the next place we expect when he will turne starke Atheist and professe as much of the word of God seing it is manifest our doctrine cheifly is founded upon the word of God even in that which sounds most harsh unto carnall judgment namely as touching God's secret providence in evill this Authour not accomodating any answer to any one of those places whereupon our doctrine is grounded And as for God's providence in working us unto holinesse his contrary doctrine cannot stand without maintaining that Grace is given according unto mens works which is expresly contradictory to the word of God 2 Tim 1. 9. Tit 3. 5 and opposed by the church of God as the sowre leaven of Pelagianisme from the Synod of Palestine all along For aske this Authour wherefore God bestowes faith upon one not upon another he hath nothing to answer but either by denying plainly that faith is the gift of God which hitherto they are not growne so impudent as to deny expresly though the Remonstrants in their Censura censurae come so farre as to deny that Christ merited faith and regeneration for any man Or they must answer that the reason hereof is because the one by some act of his or other hath prepared himselfe for the reception of divine influences the other hath not Or in plaine termes as one hath expressed it that God doth worke in us Credere to believe modo velimus provided that we will believe But doth he not worke also the very act of willing Saint Paul saith he doth yea every thing that is pleasing in his sight And how doth he worke in us this will Is it upon condition that we will This is the absurdity whereunto they are driven still fetching in a priority of mans act to the divine influence working us to that which is good yet most preposterously For what need is there of influence divine to make us to will if of our selves we will already And this also utterly overthrowes God's prescience of things future which can have no true foundation besides the divine decree As for Mathematici which were banished out of Rome were those Divines or Astrologers rather If they subjected the event of all things to the influence of the stars shall Austin be blamed or the Church of Ireland for subjecting all things to the councell of God's will and that according to the expresse testimony of holy Scripture both as touching good and evill only with this difference good things to his will of working them evill things to his will of permitting them As for Prosper's saying in the last place we make no contingent things throughout the world much lesse the actions of men to come to passe unavoidably no not upon supposition of God's decree but by vertue of his decree both contingent things come to passe contingently that is with a possibility of not comming to passe free things freely that is joyned with an active power in the Agent either to suspend his action or to doe otherwise as well as necessary things come to passe necessarily This I say we avouch with Aquinas and accordingly with him maintaine the root of contingency to be the effectuall will of God Againe I have often shewed that Predestination in the phrase of the Antients is only of such things as God decreed to bring to passe by his effection notwithstanding this Austin was bold to professe that not any thing came to passe unlesse God would have it come to passe but evill things only by suffering them good things by working them As for compulsion which is Prosper's phrase and which this Authour corrupts rendring iâ— by the urging which is ambiguous We deny that man is compelled to acts supernaturall much lesse doe we grant compulsion to acts naturall such as are all sinfull acts yea too connaturall unto him compared in Scripture to sweet morsells which they roule under their tongue as the booke of Iob resembles it By all which we may judge indifferently both of this Authour's sufficiencie and modesty Austin never said that God predestinated any man to sinne For predestination with them as hath been said was only of such things as God determined to worke Yet the same Austin confidently professeth of those things which come to passe by God's sufferance and these we all know to be evill things that they come not to passe unlesse Almighty God will have them come to passe Thus farre in answer to this Authour's additions to M. Hoord's discourse and concerning the upper and more harsh and rigorous way which M. Hoord left unprosecuted pag. 49 there is a passage added a citation out of Peter but it is of the same nature with the rest add's no strength to the argument and my answer satisfies it as well as the rest P. 52. c. Is inserted a representation how the doctrine of our Divines fighteth with God's holinesse Sect. 1. It fighteth with God's
have existed or shall exist for the future but also all that are in any possibility of existence whose existence implyeth no contradiction And that your satisfaction unto this may be the fuller and distincter I shall branch it into some particulars which I shall entreat you to cleare up unto me First there are many things that are meerely possible numberlesse millions of men and Angells which have not never had never shall have actuall existence and unto these there is possible as great a variety of both actions and sufferings which that God hath decreed to permit to come to passe conditionally in some case upon some termes upon some supposition or other is not I confesse within the compasse of my Creed but yet I shall be willing to be instructed by you provided that you prove what you undertake to teach me Now that I am not much to be blamed for making a doubt of this will I hope be confessed by you if you please to consider First that Didacus Alvarez a very learned man holds it to be the more probable opinion that there are not in God conditionall decrees concerning all future conditionall contingents which may be framed by our understandings in infinite combinations as well concerning things actually existent as also things possible but only in comparison of those future conditionalls which are revealed by God Christ or the Prophets c. And he insinuates this reason out of Ledesma because other conditionall decrees would be in vaine impertinent and no waies conducing unto Gods providence and government of the World which reason is as well applyable unto conditionall permissive as conditionall effective decrees M. Rutherford I know argueth somewhat against this but I believe you will not plow with his Heifer Secondly that D. Twisse not only affirmeth but proveth that things meerely possible are not the object of Gods decree in his Book against Iackson p. 283. 333. 394. Looke we saith he upon the decrees of men the wisest of men were they ever known to decree that a thing may be done But rather supposing many things may be done they make choyce to decree the doing of such courses as seeme most convenient things are possible without any reference to the decrees of God but only in reference to his power That is possible unto God which he can doe or which he hath power to cause that it be brought to passe As for example before the World was made it was possible that the World should be made was this by vertue of Gods decree Did God decree it to be possible If he did seeing his decrees are free it followeth that he might have chosen whether the World should have been possible or no. His arguments are applyable unto Gods permissive as well as effective decrees unto his conditionall as well as absolute decrees From agents meerely possible passe we on unto such as doe exist in some difference of time or other and unto them some things are possible only in regard of an obedientiall power some things are possible in regard of a naturall power First some things are possible and that unto all sorts of second agents only in regard of an obedientiall power thus 't is possible for ten thousand Asses besides Balaam's to speake for ten thousand peices of iron besides that mentioned 2 Kings 6. to swimme 't is possible for wine to be made of ten thousand pots of water c. Besides those sixe we read of Iohn 2. It is possible of stones to have children raised up unto Abraham Now that God hath decreed to permit all things thus possible to come to passe conditionally in some case is as I take it false and I shall give you my reason out of D. Twisse his Digression De naturà permissionis lib. 2. part 2. pag. 16. col 2. Irrationalia dicuntur permitti quoties sinuntur ferri secundùm naturam suam quemadmodum cum lapis sinitur ferri deorsum ignis sinitur grassari in domas hominum itaque circa agentia naturalia dum versatur permissio palam est praesupponi non modo propensionem sed determinationem ad agendum non sic quoties versatur circa agentia rationalia nam rationales substantiae quando permittuntur agere sinuntur etiam ferri secundum naturam suam aut alia esset ratio permissionis rerum rationalium quam irrationalium quod minime videtur Irrationall agents are said to be permitted as often as they are suffered to be carryed according to their natures as when a stone is suffered to move downeward fire to rage upon the howses of men So also rationall substances when they are permitted to act they are suffered to be moved or carryed agreeably unto their natures quoties permittuntur sibi pro domesticae inclinationis ratione quà libet feruntur ib. pag. 11. c. 1. or otherwise the nature of the permission of things rationall and irrationall would differ in regard of forme where as the difference between them is only in respect of the matter about which each is conversant as he sheweth presently after the words quoted Againe of those things which are possible unto all sorts and kinds of agents there are some which God hath absolutely decreed to effect or bring to passe by his operation some which he hath absolutely decreed to hinder or restraine Now whatsoever God worketh or effecteth he doth not permit as permission is opposed unto effection and therefore it cannot be the object of a bare permissive decree but of an operative or effective Secondly what he hindereth or restraineth either immediately by himselfe or mediately by second causes he cannot be at all said to permit and therefore he never decreed to permit it more briefely God cannot be said to decree the bare and naked permission of that whose effection or working he hath decreed he cannot be said to decree the permission of that whose hinderance or restraint he hath intended but of things possible he hath decreed the effection of some the restraint and hinderance of others and therefore there are many things possible which he hath not decreed barely to permit I but perhaps you will say that though whatsoever God hath absolutely decreed to effect or hinder he hath not decreed to permit to come to passe absolutely yet he hath decreed it shall come to passe conditionally in such cases upon such termes and upon such a supposition But this is spoken gratis and therefore I doe beseech you to evidence it by dint of argument unto which if convincing I hope I shall submit But I imagine I see a back-doore at which you intend to runne away and save your selfe the labour of medling with that worke which I have here cut out for you and that is the clause which you have added by way of Parenthesis in your consequent or at least ten thousand things more than ever shall be Here your consequent hath two propositions in it one universall then all things possible