of God is it a Christian course to renounce it or to question the integrity of it because he finds no footing in Antiquity for it What then shall become of the faith of Laicks and such as are unlearned Must the writings of the Fathers be translated into all vulgar Languages and the unlearned addict themselves to the study of them least otherwise their faith prove a wavering faith for want of finding Antiquity to favour it Belike the writings of the Prophets and Apostles are no part of Antiquity in this Authors more mature judgement But if formerly the doctrine of absolute reprobation were received upon the evidence of Gods word as it is fit the faith of every Christian should be grounded thereupon especially the faith of a Divine called to be a Teacher of others I should think there were no just cause of alteration but upon discovery of the errour of those grounds whereupon formerly it was builded and the discovery hereof alone were chiefly to the present purpose namely to shew just cause of change of mind alteration of judgement but no such course doe I find taken here These motives and reasons here proposed may carry a shew of reason why a man being yet to chuse his faith in these particulars possessed with neither way but indifferent might preferre one way before another one opinion before another but nothing sufficient to justify a change unlesse the weaknesse of former grounds be laid open For it may be that the former grounds might be such as upon due comparison would be found to overweigh these pretences For upon view that I have taken of the discourse following I find not one argument drawn from those places of Scripture that treat of election and reprobation these I find are purposely declined as so many rocks as if the Author feared to make shipwrack of his errours pardon my boldnesse in so naming them Austin is my precedent in this saying Hoc scio contra istam praedestinationem quam secundum scripturas defendimus neminem nisi errando disputare posse but in the mean time while he fears to make shipwrack of his errours let him take heed least he make shipwrack of a good conscience But proceed we with him about the inquiry what footing this doctrine finds in Antiquity He saith he cannot find it but it is more then I find that ever he made any convenient search after it his whole discourse hereupon is of so hungry a nature The absolutenesse of election and reprobation we conclude in Christian reason from Gods absolute carriage in giving and denying grace understanding thereby the grace of regeneration Now the absolutenesse herein as we suppose consists in bestowing this grace on some and denying it to others according to the meer pleasure of the Lords will Now hath not the Apostle more ancient then all the Antiquity he speaketh of professed in expresse termes that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth What need we seek farther amongst the Ancients for the iustification of this And that mercy here is meant such a mercy in bestowing faith on some which is denied to others in converting the wills of some unto good when others are not converted I could prove by variety of places out of Austin whose authority in this case is farre more worthy then all the authority this Author produceth Neither is this the voyce of Austin only but of Ambrose also in that famous saying of his Quem vult religiosum facit so much magnified by Austin And not Ambrose alone but Nazianzen also and Cyprian are alleaged by him as concurring with him in the foundation of the doctrine of predestination which he makes to be the freedome of Gods grace in converting whom he will And which is farre more then this yea farre more then all that can be produced to the contrary by the very Prayers of the Church every where in use he iustifies the generall concurrence in that which he accounts the foundation of predestination As when their common course was to pray unto God that he would be pleased to convert unto the faith of Christ the hearts of Heathens and wherein did this conversion consist but in giving them faith and repentance manifestly giving us to understand thereby that the whole Catholique Church did concurre in this Article of Faith that it was in the power of God according to his free grace to convert whom he would unto the faith of Christ and consequently not to convert whom he would For if there were any cause on mans part why he doth not convert some converting others then there were also on mans part a cause why God doth convert some not converting others and consequently grace should be given according unto works that is in the phrase of the Ancients Gratiam dari secundum merita as Bellarmine acknowledgeth which was ever accounted expresse Pelagianisme and was as expressely condemned in the Councel of Palestina above 1200 years agoe and Pelagius himselfe was driven to subscribe unto it by shamefull dissimulation so to prevent Anathematization of his own person But the upper way saith this Author was never taught or approved by any of the Fathers for 600 years Here breaks forth another reason of this Authors or his that directed him cunning carriage in distinguishing the two waies of our Divines in maintaining the absolutenesse of election and reprobation to wit that in the course of his discourse he might serve his turne with both and where Antiquity served not his turne against the one yet might it serve his turne as he thought against the other But the truth is there was no such question at all ventilated in those daies as touching the obiect of predestination no nor in Austins neither nor many hundred years after that I know And no marvell For it concernes the ordering of Gods decree aright which is meerly Logicall as I have shewed in my Vind. Grat. Dei It s true that S t Austin doth usually accommodate that of S t Paul Rom. 9. 21. concerning the Masse unto mankind considered in Massa damnata as he commonly calls it that is in the corrupt Masse but not alwaies but sometimes he speaks of it and accommodates it cleerely unto the Masse of mankind uncorrupt yea as yet not created as there I have shewed And as for the right ordering of Gods decrees and the right stating of the object of predestination and reprobation We desire no better nor other ground then that of the Apostle God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth that is he cures infidelity and hardnes of heart in whom he will by bestowing faith and repentance upon them and leaves it uncured in whom he will by denying faith and repentance unto them And as for the rigour of this Tenent as it is commonly accounted of making the Masse of mankind not created the object of predestination I have already shewed the vanity of that
manner who shall deliver me from the body of this death And receiving a gracious answer concerning this concludes with thankes I thank my God through my Lord Jesus Christ if I have a will to believe to repent I have no cause to complaine but to runne rather unto God with thankes for this and pray him to give that power which I find wanting in me And indeed as I may adde in the fourth place this impotency of believing and infidelity the fruit of naturall corruption common to all is meerely a morall impotency and the very ground of it is the corruption of the will therefore men cannot believe cannot repent cannot doe any thing pleasing unto God because they will not they have no delight therein but all their delight is carnall sensuall and because they are in the flesh they â—annot please God and because of the hardnesse of their hearts they cannot repent sinne is to them as a sweet morsell unto an Epicure which he rolleth under his tongue Fiftly dost thou blaspheame God because of Leprous Parents thou art begot and conceived and borne a leprous child What impudency then is it in thee to challenge him for injustice in that the spirituall leprosy of thy first Parents is propagated to thy soule Lastly if thou renouncest the Gospell what reason hast thou to complaine of want of power to embrace it so farre as not to renounce it hast thou not as much power to believe as Simon Magus had as many a prophane person and hipocrite hath that is bred and brought up in the Church of God Hadst thou gone so farre as they and performed submission unto the Gospell by profesing it surely thou shouldest never be brought to condemnation for not professing of it but rather for not walking according to the rule of it which thou promisedst when first thou gavest thy name to Christ I come to the third 3. Look what the Word promiseth that doe the Sacraments scale the word promiseth Justification Salvation to all that beleive the same doth the Sacraments seal As Circumsion Rom. 4. 5. Is said to be the seale of the Rightiousnes of faith so is Baptisme it did in our Saviours dayes and in the dayes of his Apostles seale to the believer and penitent Person the assurance of the forgivenesse of their sinnes over and above Baptisme is the Sacrament of our birth in Christ and the Lords Supper of our growth in Christ each an outward and visible signe of an inward invisible grace But what is the grace were of the Sacrament is a signe Is it a power to doe good if a man will Call you that grace which is not so much as goodnesse for certainly goodnesse consists not in a power to doe good if a man will but in a definite inclination of the will it selfe to delight in that which is good and to be prone to doe it But this grace whereof Baptisme is a signe is suo tempore conferenda like as Circumcision was even to those Jewes who yet were not regenerated untill they were partakers of the Gospell Jam. 1. 18. Of his own will hath he begotten us by the word of truth Writing unto the twelve tribes of the Jewes And it is very strange to me that regeneration should so many years goe before vocation But this opposite Doctrine and the sealing of a blanke is nothing strange to me I was acquainted with it twenty yeares agoe and I seeme plainly to discerne the chimney from whence all the smoake comes 4. As for other gifts bestowed on the Reprobates 1. We willingly confesse they shall never bring them to salvation be they as great as those who were bestowed on Aristotle Plato Aristides Sophocles and the most learned morall and wise men of the World that never were acquainted with the mystery of Godlinesse it was wont to be received generally for a truth that Extra Ecclesiam non est satus But Arminians take liberty to coyne new Articles of our Creed 2. But yet they may doe them good hereby they may Proficere ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur For certainly it shall be easier in the day of udgement for Cicero then for Cattline for Augustus than for Tiberius for Trajan than for Heliogabalus 3. And therefore it is certainly false that they are hurtfull and that they proceed out of extreme hatred And as for love the Scripture teacheth us that Jacob was loved of God and Esau hated each before they were borne Such is the condition of all the elect as Jacob of all the Reprobates as Esau and in Thomas Aquinas his judgement Non velle alicui vitam aeternam est ipsum odisse Knowledge I confesse of the mysteries of Godlinesse where life and conversation is not answerable doth encrease mens condemnation neither is God bound to change the corrupt heart of any man if they are workers of iniquity Christ will not know them at the great day though they have Prophesyed in his name and in his name cast out Devills neither was it ever heard of that the graces of edification and graces of sanctification must goe together and that God in giving the one is bound to give the other As for being proud of them pride for ought I know requires no other causes but domesticall corruption but he that acknowledgeth God to be the giver of any gift and hath an heart to be thankfull for it I make no doubt but he hath more grace than of edification only certainly the gifts they have sinke them not to hell but their corrupt heart in abusing them And hath a man no cause to be thankfull unto God for one gift unlesse he will adde another The Gentiles are charged for unthankfulnesse Rom. 1. But it seems by this Authors Divinity it was without cause unlesse we will with this Author say they all had sufficiency of meanes without and power within to bring them to salvation and what had Israell more Or the elect of God more in any age True for according to the Arminian tenet an elect hath no more cause to be thankfull to God for any converting grace than a Reprobate In a word what good act wrought in the heart of man whether of faith or of repentance or any kind of obedience hath man cause to be thankfull to God for when God workes it in him no otherwise than modó homo velit and so they confesse he workes every sinfull act Have they not in this case more cause to thank themselves than to thank God And unlesse we concurre with them in so shamelesse unchristian gracelesse and senselesse an opinion and in effect if God converts the heart of man according to the meere pleasure of his will and hardeneth others all the gifts that he bestowes on man are censured by this audacious censurer as Sauls bestowing Michal on David Jaells courtesy and usurers bounty c. or a baite for a poore fish as if God needed any such course
by the opposition of it to obduration which is such as whereupon followeth disobedience as appeares by the objection following hereupon Thou wilt say then why doth yet cōplaine For who hath resisted his will Now God complaineth of nothing but disobedience Againe to give faith is to shew mercy For to have faith is to obtaine mercy Heretofore ye have not believed but now have obtained mercy through their unbeliefe Where to believe to obtaine mercy are made equipollent of the same signification And in reason if God did deny faith because of some unpreparednesse in the creature then God did expect that the creature should first prepare himselfe and make himselfe fit for faith that so God might bestow it upon him so grace should be conferr'd according to workes which is contradictious to expresse testimony of holy scripture testifying that God hath saved us called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose and grace all along hath beene condened in the Church of God for Pelagianisme Thus we have beene entertained with a discourse containing nothing but the opinion of our Divines which none of us deny Yet in the proposing hereof he hath wasted a whole leafe and more Now he comes to his argument drawen from these two layd together 1. That God did bring men into a necessity of sinning 2. That he hath left the reprobates under this necessity Hence he concludes that God is the Author of the reprobates sins But this we utterly deny Therefore this he undertakes to prove by two reasons 1. Because the cause of the cause is the cause of its effect if there be a necessary subordination betweene the causes and the effect But God is the cheife or sole cause by their doctrine of that which is the necessary and immediate cause of the sinnes of Reprobates namely their impotency and want of supernaturall grace For answer whereunto I say first begining with the minor 1. That the want of supernaturall grace is not the immediate cause of the sinnes of Reprobates nor the cheife cause much lesse the sole cause And I prove it evidently Let instance be given in any sinne committed by a Reprobate let it be the sinne of murther or of fornication or of theft or of lying For if it were then every reprobate should be guilty of murther of fornication of lying of stealing For positâ causâ principali immediatâ ponitur effectus Where a principall and immediate cause doth exist there the effect must needs exist But it is apparent that albeit every reprobate doth want supernaturall grace yet every reprobate is not guilty of murther of fornication lying and stealing Secondly If the want of supernaturall grace were the immediate and principall cause of all the sinnes of reprobates then not only every Reprobate should be guilty of committing all the sinnes formerly mentioned but at all times every one of these sinnes should be committed by them Because at all times they want supernaturall grace And the truth is every one of these sinnes may be abstained from without supernaturall grace and for carnall respects Only without supernaturall grace they cannot be abstained from in a gracious manner as namely out of faith in God and love to God He that hath neither faith nor love cannot abstaine from these vile courses out of faith and love In like sort heathen men in their generations have beene exceeding vertuous according to the worlds account of vertue in moderating their passions and ordering their conversation aright one towards another and all this hath beene performed by them without supernaturall grace Thirdly The immediate cause of all their sinnes rather of the two is their naturall corruption whereby they are habitually turned away from God and converted unto the creature in an inordinate manner Like as the immediate cause actionis laesae of a naturall function of the body imperfect is the disease or infirmity that hath seised upon some part of the body And the Physitian who is able to cure it and will not is the cause why it continueth uncured But no wise man will say he is the cause why this or that member in a sicke mans body doth not performe its operation as it should In like manner as touching the vicious actions of the soule the want of supernaturall grace is the cause why those vicious actions continue uncured because God alone by his grace can cure them but no sober man that is well in his wits should say that is the cause of vicious actions but acknowledge rather the corruption thereof to be the cause of these vicious actions And indeed all morall philosophy referres the cause of every vicious action unto the vicious habit depraving the will and inclining it to vicious courses Fourthly Yet farther to represent the wildnesse of this Authours discourse The vicious habit it selfe is not the sole cause no nor the principall and immediate cause of a vicious action in particular For if it were then that particular vicious action should alwayes be committed by it So that an impure person should alwayes commit fornication a Lyar should alwayes lye a Theife should alwayes steale a Murtheret should alwayes commit murther For it is a rule generally received that the immediate and principall cause being existent the effect must needs exist also And indeed albeit habits whether good or evill do worke after the manner of nature inclining and swaying the will to the accomplishment of them Yet the will of man being a free and not necessary Agent proceeds not to worke but according unto judgement and occasions and opportunityes from without And albeit a purser that maintaine himselfe by robbery hath a faire opportunity offered him to advantage himselfe to take a purse yet if upon consideration he finds himselfe too weake to goe through with it or that he cannot do it safely he will forbeare For albeit a vicious habit doth naturally and necessarily incline him to a naughty end yet in the choice of the meanes conducing to this end he is free How much more plainely doth it appeare that the want of supernaturall grace is farre off from being either the sole cause or the immediate or the principall cause of any sinne committed by a Reprobate Rather of the two the intestine corruption of the Reprobate is the cause of his sinnes and the want of grace is the cause why this corruption is not cured Now albeit a Physitian may sinne in not curing a sicke person when it lyes in his power to cure him For we are in charity bound to do to others as we would have others do unto us yet God is bound to none I will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion 2. Observe how sluttishly he carryeth himselfe in the next reason taken from removens prohibens His rule proceeds both of withdrawing and withholding a thing which being
we acknowledge of predestination both in the way of a meritorious cause on Christs part and in the way of a disposing cause on our part For God we say hath predestinated to bestow upon us both grace and glory for Christs sake where Christ is made a meritorious cause of grace and glory but not of the act of predestination And farther we say that God hath predestinated to bestow glory upon us as a reward of grace as a reward of faith repentance and good workes and to this purpose it is said that God by his grace doth make us meet partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light Coloss 1. 12. But as for the bestowing of grace on any we say there is no cause thereof on mans part For he hath mercy on whom he will Rom. 9. 18. and he hath called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace 2 Timoth. 1. 9. Now let us apply this to reprobation which is the will of God as well as predestination and if there can be no cause of predestination quoad actum Praedestinantis because there can be no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis Who seeth not that by the same reason there can be no cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And if it be a mad thing to maintain that merits are the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis it must be as mad a thing to maintain that any merits of the creature can be the cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And this doctrine Aquinas applies expresly to Reprobation it selfe upon the 9. Rom. Lect. 2 da at the end of these words Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis but how ex parte actus reprobantis nothing lesse but rather ex parte effectus and what effect not the denying of grace but only as touching the inflicting of punishment thus Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis ex parte paenae quae praeparatur reprobatis in quantum scilicet Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata quae à seipsis habent non à Deo And farther we prove this both by cleare evidence of Scripture and cleare evidence of reason and thirdly by as cleare a representation of their infatuation that oppose this doctrine and particularly of the Author of this discourse First by cleare evidence of Scripture Rom. 9. 11. Where the Apostle proves that Election stands not of good works by an argument drawn from the circumstance of the time when that Oracle The elder shall serve the younger was delivered together with the present condition of Jacob and Esau answerable to that time thus Before the children were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger Therefore the purpose of God according to Election stands not of good workes Now look by what strength of reason the Apostle concludes this of Election by the same strength of argumentation may I conclude of reprobation in proportion thus Before the Children were borne or had done Good or Evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger therefore the purpose of God according to reprobation stands not of evill workes that is like as good workes are not the cause of Election so evill workes are not the cause of Reprobation to wit quoad actum reprobantis as touching the very act and eternall decree of God it selfe Secondly observe I pray whether my reason be not as cleare If God upon the foresight of sin doth ordain a man unto damnation thus I am content to propose it in the most rigorous manner then this is done either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as it is confessed and the cause is evident for undoubtedly he could annihilate them and so he can the holiest creature that lives as all sides confesse Therefore it must be by the constitution of God but neither can this hold For if so then God did constitute that is ordaine that upon the foresight of sin he would ordaine men unto damnation Where observe that the act of divine ordination is made the object of divine ordination as much as to say he did ordaine to ordaine or he did decree to decree Whereas the objects of Gods decrees are alwaies things temporall as for example We say well God did decree to create the world to make man out of the earth to send Christ into the World to preserve us to redeeme us sanctify us save us But Gods ordination or decree is an act eternall and cannot be the object of his decree or ordination I challenge all the Powers of darknes to answer this and to vindicate the Tenent which I impugne from that absurdity which I charge upon it if they can O but some will say it 's very harsh to say that God of his meer pleasure doth ordain men unto damnation I am content to doe my endeavour to remove this scandall out of the way of honest hearts yea and out of the way of others also First therefore consider is it fit to resist the evidence of divine truth because it is harsh to mens affections Secondly Wherein consists this harshnesse Is it in this that nothing is the cause of Gods decree and will nothing temper the harshnes of it unles a thing temporall as sinne be made the cause of Gods will which is eternall and even God himselfe But let us deale plainly and tell me in truth whether the harshnes doth not consist in this That the meer pleasure of Gods will seems to be made the cause not of Gods decree only but of damnation also as if God did damne men not for sin but of his meer pleasure And this I confesse is wondrous harsh and yet no more harsh then it is untrue though in this jugling world things are so carried by some who will both shuffle and cutt and deale themselves as if we made God of meer pleasure to damne men and not for sin which is a thing utterly impossible damnation being such a notion as hath essentiall reference unto sin But if God damne no man but for sinne and decreed to damne no man but for sinne what if the meer pleasure of God be the cause of this decree what harshnes I say is this As for example Zimri or Cosby perished in their incestuous act and gave up both lust and ghost together so going as it were quick to Hell never fearing the judgements of God untill they felt them If we say God decreed they should be cut off in this sin of theirs and be damned for it What hatshnes I pray in this though God made this decree of meer pleasure For is it not manifest he did For could he not if it had pleased him have caused them to outlive this sin of theirs and given them space for repentance and
not space only but grace also for repentance seeing as Austin saith Quantamlibet praebuerit Patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis aget Paenitentiam Now I pray what is become of the harshnes of this our Tenent as is pretended And the truth is the harshnes lyeth not here though our Adversaries would faine draw it hither but rather on the other part of reprobation as it denotes Gods purpose for the denying of grace to wit the grace of Regeneration the grace of faith and repentance but on this part they are not very forward to cry out upon our Tenent as savouring of harshnes but themselves rather driven to such straites as either to deny faith and repentaince to be the gift of God wherein the Remonstrants now a daies are come so far as cleerely to professe that Christ merited not faith and Regeneration for any whence it followeth that if God doth give faith and repentance unto any yet it is not for Christs sake that he gives it Or being demanded how it comes to passe that God gives it not to all if his meer pleasure be not the cause of this difference as namely in shewing mercy unto some when he hardens others they are put upon this shift to say that if they would believe God would give them faith if they would repent God would give them repentance and one that I have had to deale with on this very argument spares not to professe that God doth work in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle credere resipiscere modè Velit One thing I had almost pretermitted and that was to represent the infatuate condition of this declaration to wit as touching the Authors Tenet in opposition to ours as in saying that Gods decree to cast off men for ever is grounded upon the foresight of their continuance in sin and unbeliefe For this continuance must be understood of finall continuance therein least otherwise the contradiction to our Tenent be not duely expressed Now the foresight hereof is made to precede Gods casting men off for ever but from what surely from grace and glory in contradiction to our Tenent as here it is shaped and consequently in election the foresight of finall perseverance in faith and repentance must be shaped to precede Gods giving grace to wit in another world as if the other world were appoynted for the giving of grace to some and denying it another and that the giving of the grace of faith and repentance and denying it unto others was after the one hath persevered in faith and repentance and the other in infidelity and impenitency unto the end in this World For this is it we meane by grace when we say God in Election destinates it to one and in Reprobation decrees to deny it unto the other and in contradicting us it is fit they should use our termes in our meaning unles they expresse the contrary and give a reason of it 3. As for the Persons on whom this decree passeth and the aggravation there mentioned namely of shutting up the greater part of men even of those that are called under sinne and damnation This is confessed on all hands That the greatest part of men are reprobated even of those that are called and our Saviour hath expresly given us to understand That many are called but few are chosen And it is without question that if it be lawfull for God to deale thus with one it is as lawfull to deale so with the greatest part yea with all And experience justifieth that the greatest part of them that are called doe not performe true faith and repentance and if they did and dye therein then the greatest part of them that are called should be chosen Whereby it is manifest that God doth not give Faith and Repentance unto the greatest part of them that are called and consequently it is nothing strange that he shuts up the greatest part of them that are called under Damnation So that in true account there is no weight at all of aggravation in this Like as you have read in Newes from Parnassus that when the French and the Spaniard weighed their powers in the ballance and the French being found to weigh 25 Millions and the Spaniard but 20 He thinking to help the matter and to make himselfe as weighty as the French clapped into the scale the Kingdome of Naples and the Dukedome of Millan but beyond his expectation the scale proved never a whit the more weighty then before but lighter rather 4. As for the last claw to help the matter with a couple of Epethetes of invincible sin and unavoidable damnation one of these might have sufficed to be expressed seeing undoubtedly Damnation is no otherwise avoidable by man then by avoiding sin the cause thereof For it is undenyable that man dying in sin his damnation is unavoydable by the whole power of nature But as for the avoydablenes of sin the Author of this Discourse acknowledgeth it no otherwise then by grace and we willingly professe that all sin is avoydable by grace But by the way it is implied that such a grace is afforded unto all reprobates whereby they may avoyd that infidelity and impenitency for which they are damned But this we deny For if this were true then all Reprobates were enabled to believe to repent to please God to discerne the things of God to be subject to the Law of God but to say this is directly to contradict the Word of God which professeth of some that They could not believe Ioh. 12. 39. of others that They cannot repent Rom. 2. 5. Of all naturall men that They cannot discern the things of God as which seem foolishnesse unto them 1 Cor. 2. 14. of them that are in the flesh that They cannot please God Rom. 8. 8. of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the affection of the flesh that 't is enmity against God and it is not subject to the Law of God nor can be Rom. 8. 7. And of the Israelites in the Wildernesse for forty years together God had not given them eyes to see nor eares to heare nor an heart to perceive Deutron 29. 4. INTRODUCTION SECT II. THE first side is divided for 1. Some of them present man to God in the decree of Reprobation considered and looked upon out of or above the Fall and make the Will of God without any consideration of sin in man Originall or Actuall to be the cause of his eternall Rejection that so he might shew his absolute and unlimited power and dominion over him in appointing to heaven or hell whom he pleased and this way goe Calvin Beza Zanchius Piscator Gomarus That way seems to charge God very deepely and to make him the prime and principall cause of mens everlasting ruine and the author also not only of the first sin that entred into the world but of all other sins likewise that are successively committed therein as meanes to bring men by a course and colour of justice to those
pag. 710. Cùm de praedestinatione sermo habetur inde exordiendum esse constantèr semper docui atquè hodiè doceo jure in more relinqui omnes reprobos qui in Adam mortui sunt atquè damnati As for Beza I know full well he maintained that man not created is the object of Predestination but can this Author represent unto us any place out of Beza wherein he should affirme that God doth decree to damne any man but for sin or that damnation is the end that God intends in the decree of Predestination to death In his Questions and Answers he professeth the contrary pag. 111. Postremò non dixi exitium istorum he speaks of Reprobates esse finem deo decernenti propositum sed gloriam ipsius Nequè etiam simpliciter dixi istos esse exitio destinatos sed justo exitio destinatos dixi And in his Book De aeternâ Dei Praedestinatione contrà Sebastian Castell ad argument Castell 2. pag. 346. Quamobrem etiam illud quoquè probavimus nos ita loqui non solere quanquam à Deo simpliciter conditum dicamus ad perditionem sed idcircò ut ipsius justa condemnatione Dominus justitiam suam patefaciat As for Zanchy Peter Baro that caused such perturbation in Cambridge about this very argument he denyes this to have been the opinion of Zanchy In summa trium de Praedestinatione sententiarum his words are these Altera sententia est Augustini posterior etiam Sohnii Heydelbergensis Theologiae Professoris aliorum quorundam Protestantium ut Zanchii atquè etiam Bellarmini qui omnes priorem illam improbant in hoc inter se consentientes ut sit praedestinatio ab Adami tantum lapsu accipienda And as touching Piscator he handles the question about the object of Predestination in a small Treatise annexed to an answer of his to Hemingius De Universali Gratiâ and inquires whether the obiect thereof be Humanum genus nondum conditum or conditum but nondum corruptum or both conditum and corruptum and his resolution is that in the decree of Predestination there is place for all these considerations according to three severall acts comprised therein which I have formerly mentioned and so drawes into one all three opinious As touching Gomarus in the last place I have seen little or nothing of his but when Lubbertus in his Book Ad 99 Errores Conradi Vorstii pag. 807. had professed Massam consideratam esse a Deo non ut integram sed ut corruptam and was charged by Vostius as delivering that which was contrary to the doctrine of Calvin Beza and Gomarus he replies that herein he doth not contradict them but saith he Illorum dict a quae quibusdam asperiuscula videntur lenio in commodissimum sensum interpretor But be it so that all of them made Humanum genus not corruptum no nor integrum but nondum conditum the object of reprobation I am of their mind that doe so and was not D r Whitaker also whom very wisely this Author conceales This renowned Professor in the University of Cambridge in a Publique exercise his Concio ad Clerum professeth what Paul speaks De luto sigulo non posse melius exponi quà m de Massâ incorruptâ and that Bucer understands it thus Bucerus per Massam intelligit primam humani ganeris originem ex quá homo conditus à Deo fabricatus est And he disputes at large that there is no cause of reprobation and that neither sin actuall nor sin originall is the cause thereof and professeth this to be the Opinion of the Church of England And though now a daies we be upbraided as if we had learned it of Papists and Schoole Divines this great light of Cambridge spares not to make honourable mention of Schoolemens sollid discourse on this point saying Hanc sententiam Scholastici si ullam egregiè solideque pertractarum praeserùm qui insigniores sanioresque habiti sunt Lombardus ait ut praedestinationis nulla merita sunt ità nec reprobationis Now the doctrine which he saith the Schoolemen handle so solidly as none more is the very doctrine which this Author seems here to impugne as when he saith some make the will of God without any consideration of sin in men originall or actuall to be the cause of their eternall Rejection for D r Whitaker expresseth it thus His igitur isto modo explicatis sequitur tertiam opinionem solummodò necessario veram esse aequè reprobationis ac praedestinationis causam esse dei voluntatem quandoquidem providentiae divinae munus est omnia ad fines istos certa ratione certisque mediis ordinare Only as touching the end here mentioned That so he might shew his absolute and unlimited power and dominion over them in appointing to heaven or hell whom he pleaseth that I find not in D r Whitaker He saith plainly that God predestinated unto death whom he would and because he would Deus igitur ad mortem praedestinavit quos voluit quia voluit which phrase I willingly confesse I like not so well but that the end thereof is to manifest his absolute and unlimited dominion and power he saith not and Beza in the places before mentioned referres it to the manifestation of Gods justice as the end thereof And like as he saith certissimum est damnationem nunquam nisi propter Peccatum infligi so I should think it nothing lesse certain that God doth not ordaine any man to be damned but for sin especially cosidering that damnation in the notion thereof hath an essential reference to sin Now since I have found such a Champion as D r Whitaker for the maintenance of this Tenent have I cause to feare the sharp censures of any professors in the Country Were he alive I presume he would be nothing skarred with the imputation of making God the Prime and Principall cause of mens everlasting ruine he would I think require a little more learning in the Criminator then to expresse himselfe so crudely For without all question God is the prime and principall cause nay the sole cause of mans everlasting ruine in genere causae efficient is though this excludes not a meritorious cause of his own damnation on the creatures part as D r Whitaker professeth in the words formerly alleadging acknowledged Damnationem infligi propter Peccatum And farther I am apt to conceive and have undertaken to justify and that to the view of the World that albeit mankind not created be the only object of predestination and reprobation yet no mans reprobation is made by God citra considerationem Peccati in as much as I hold that the decrees of creation permission of sin and of finall perseverance therein and lastly of damnation for sin are not decrees subordinate but coordinate and simultaneous as being decrees concerning means tending to the same end which is the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of vindicative justice
cause in man any way moving him either in its own nature or by divine constitution moving him to bestow this grace on any So the Apostle 2 Timoth. 1. 9. God hath saved us and called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace And indeed we being all found dead in sinne what could be found in one to move God to bestow the life of faith and repentance upon him more then upon another And if any such thing were found in man moving God hereunto then should grace be bestowed according unto works that is in the Fathers phraise as Bellarmine acknowledgeth according unto merits which was condemned 1200 years agoe in the Synod of Palestine and Pelagius himselfe was driven to subscribe unto it otherwise they had condemned him also But as touching the conferring of glory God doth not bestow this on whom he will finding men equall without any moving cause thereunto even in man For though there be no moving cause hereunto in man of its own nature yet there is to be found a moving cause in man by constitution divine whereby God is as it were moved to bestow solvation on some and not on others For God hath made a gracious promise that whosoever beleeveth and repenteth and continueth in faith and repentance unto death shall be saved and whosoever beleeveth not and repenteth not shall be damned So then though men are equall in originall sinne and in naturall corruption and God bestowes faith and repentance on whom of them he will curing their corruption in whom he will yet when he comes to the conferring of glory men are not found equall in morall condition and accordingly God cannot be said on like manner to bestow glory solvation on whō he will For he hath tyed himselfe by his own constitution to bestow solvation on none but such as dye in thestate of grace Yet I confes some say that God bestows solvation on whom he will in as much as he is the author of their faith repentance bestows these graces on whō he will yet certainly there is a different manner in the use of this phraise of bestowing this or that on whom he will For when God bestowes faith and repentance he findes them on whom he will bestow it no better then others But when he comes to the bestowing of glory he findes them on whom he bestowes that farre better them others Now we come to the things decreed in reprobation and these are two 1. The denyall of the grace of regeneration that is of the grace of faith and repentance whereby mans naturall infidelity and impenitency is cured 2. The denyall of glory and the inflicting of damnation The first of these to wit the denyall of grace mentioned is made to whom he will And it must needs be so in ease God gives this grace to whom he will And the Apostle professeth that as God hath mercy on whom he will so he hardneth whom he will And as God denies this grace to whom he will so did he decree to deny it to whom he will Yet there is a difference considerable For albeit God hardneth whom he will by denying unto them the grace of faith and repentance yet notwithstanding like as it is just with God to inflict damnation upon them for that sinne whether originall or actuall wherein he findes them when the ministry of the word is afforded them so likewise it cannot be denied to be iust with God to leave their infidelity and impenitency wherein he finds them uncured But yet because God hath not made any such constitution namely that whosoever is found in infidelity and impenitency shall be so left and abandoned by him therefore he is properly said as to cure it in whom he will so to leave it uncured in whom he will finding them all equall in originall sinne and consequently lying equally in this their naturall infidelity and impenitencv So wee may iustly say there is no cause at all in man of this difference to wit why God cures infidelity impenitency in one and not in another but it is the meer pleasure of God that is the cause of this difference And if any list to contend hereabouts we shall be willing to entertaine him and conferre our strength of argumentation on this point 2. But as touching the denyall of glory and inflicting of damnation which is the second thing decreed in reprobation there is alwaies found a cause motive yea and meritorious hereof to wit both of the denyall of the one inflicting of the other And God doth not proceed herein according to the meer pleasure of his will that by reason of his own constitution having ordained that whosoever continueth finally in infidelity in profane courses and impenitency shall be damned And albeit on the other side it may be said in some sence as formerly I have shewed that God saves whom he will in as much as he is the author of faith which he bestowes on whom he will yet in no congruous sence can he be said to damne whom he will for as much as he is not the author of sinne as he is the author of faith For every good thing he workes but sinne and the evill thereof he only permits not causeth it And lastly as God doth not damne whom he will but those only whom he finds finally to have persevered in sinne without repentance so neither did he decree to damne or reprobate to damnation whom he will but only those who should be found finally to persevere in sinne without repentance Now let us apply this to the Article we have in hand which is this The moving cause of reprobation is the only will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall and for the explication hereof according to that which hath been formerly delivered We say that reprobation doth signify either a purpose of denying grace as above mentioned or a purpose of inflicting damnation And each may be considered either as touching the act of Gods decree or as touching the things decreed We shew how the Article holds or holds not being differently accommodated 1. As touching the things decreed 1. As touching the deniall of grace We say That God decreed of his meere good pleasure to deny unto some the grace of faith and repentance for the curing of that naturall infidelity and impenitency which is found in all without any motive cause hereunto found in one more then in another 2. As touching the inflicting of Damnation We say That God decreed to inflict damnation on some not of his meer pleasure but meerly for their finall perseverance in sinne without repentance 2. As touching the very act of Gods decree We say Nothing in man could be the cause hereof but the meer pleasure of God as Aquinas professeth it a mad thing to devise in man a cause of divine predestination as touching the act of God predestinating as I have
yet are driven to devise what may be said to excuse them as in the very point of Free-will they desire to excuse Chrysostome Sixtus Senensis Bibliothâ—â— lib. 5. annotat 101. Uel dicendum est sicut etiam Annianus in Praefatione Commentariorum Chryjostomi in Math. annotavit Chrysostomum interdum naturae nostrae vires plus aequo extulisse ex contentione disceptandi cum Manichaeis Gentilibus qui hominem asserebant vel naturâ malum vel fati violentia ad peccandum compelli Nay what think we of Vossius himselfe from whose labours it is and nothing of their own that our Arminians would seem to breath so much Antiquity This Vossius professeth they mistake him that taketh him to be of any other opinion in the poynt of predestination then Austin was of De Historicis Lat. lib. 2. cap. 17. Yet doth he acknowledge that Austin did reject the opinion of the Ancients both Greeks and Latines who went before him in the point of predestination Histor Pelag. pag. 655. Patres Graeci Latinorum illi qui ante Augustinum vixerunt ipseque aliquandiu Augustinus verba Apostoli interpretari solent de electione quorundam ad salutem secundum fidem pietatem praevisam aliorum reprobatione aeterna ob praescientiam malorum operum quae in vita acturi essent Sed Augustinus here comes in the Adversative rejectâ hâc opinione existimabat Apostolorum loqui de quorundam electione ad vitam aliorum item praeteritione non habitâ vel in his vel in illis ratione sive bonorum sive etiam malorum quae personalia forent And which is more then this Pag. 653. professeth a third interpretation of that passage Rom. 9. 11 12 13. differing both from Austins interpretation and from that of the Fathers Greeke and Latine that went before him and makes it disputable which is truest though this third opinion hath no footstep amongst the Ancients and thus he carrieth himselfe notwithstanding all the pretence of his reverence of Antiquity And to vindicate Austins interpretation as well as the rest from countenancing absolute reprobation he calls in to help at a dead lift the doctrine of the Jesuits concerning Scientia Media And I desire upon no better termes to contend then this in Scholasticall Divinity whether this doctrine be not a most unsober invention without all ground And whereas Vossius acknowledgeth Austins opinion to be for the absolutenesse of election and he professeth himselfe to be of Austins opinion I dare appeale to any learned Divines sober judgement whether this doctrine of Scientia Media doth not equally justify the absolutenesse of reprobation as the absolutenesse of election Yet after all this I would not have any think that I reject any of these ancient Fathers that seem to be most opposite to Austins opinion in the point of predestination I think they may be fairely and Scholastically reconciled without acknowledging so much difference between them as Vossius maketh and that by such an interpretation as sometimes is admitted by Vossius himselfe of his own phraise of his own distinction though he dreames not of the applyable nature of the same to the will of God in predestination His distinction is of Voluntas Dei antecedens voluntas consequens and this he makes equivalent to that other distinction of the will of God to wit Absoluta Conditionalis Now this Conditionall will of God he interprets not quoad actum volentis but quoad Res volitas Like as Doctor Jackson professeth in expresse termes that the former distinction of voluntas antecedens consequens is to be interpreted namely quoad res volitas and not quoad actum volentis Now according to this construction there is no difference between them and Austin nor the least impediment to the making of the will of God both in predestination and reprobation to be most absolute For though sinne be acknowledged to be the cause of the will of God in reprobation quoad res volitas that is in respect of the punishment willed thereby this hinders not the absolutenesse of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And unlesse we understand the Fathers thus we must necessarily charge them with such an opinion whereof Aquinas is bold to professe That never any man was so madde as to affirme to wit that any merits should be the cause of Predestination quoad actum praedestinantis And why so to wit because predestination is the act of Gods will and there can be no cause of Gods will quoad actum volentis Now who seeth not that by the same reason there can be no cause of divine reprobation quoad actum reprobantis for even reprobation is the act of Gods will as well as predestination and every way it must be as madde a thing to devise a cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis They did all generally agree saith this Author upon the contrary conclusion Now the contrary Conclusion to absolute and unavoidable reprobation is to maintain conditionall and avoidable reprobation but this is not the contrary conclusion here specified by this Author but rather that damnation was avoydable such is his loose discourse whereas there is no question at all concerning damnation whether it be conditionall or absolute We all confessing that like as salvation is not ordained to befall any man of ripe years but upon the performance of faith and repentance and finall perseverance therein so damnation is not ordained to be the portion of any but upon their finall perseverance in sinne In like sort as touching the possibility of salvation not one Divine of ours that I know denyes the possibility of any mans salvation while he lives in this World Doctor Jackson indeed hath an opinion that a man may proceed so farre in sinne in this life that the doore of repentance may be shut upon him Wee have no such opinion We acknowledge that as God calls some at the first houre so may some be called at the last houre of the day yea the Thiefe upon the Crosse yea inter Pontem Fontem In a word We say plainly that it is possible for any man at any time to be saved by grace giving repentance without repentance none can be saved which is I presume without question between us In like sort it is possible for any man to repent provided that God be pleased to give him repentance and whether God will give him repentance or no we know not Therefore the Apostle instructs Timothy after this manner The servant of the Lord must not strive but must be gentle towards all men apt to teach suffering the evill instructing them with meeknesse that be contrary minded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if at any time God may give them repentance that they may acknowledge the truth and come to amendment out of the snare of the Devill of whom they are taken Prisoners to doe his Will Here is clearely an acknowledgement of a possibility of repentance
hâc solummodo de causa quia haud perinde capiunt ea quae alias in Scholis in Disputationibus contra adversarios ut Paulus ait inter perfectos utiliter ex fundamentis eloquiorum Dei astrui solent Coram rudioribus ergo simplicior loquendi ratio ipsorum captui accommodatior est si dicamus Deum ad haereditatem regni caelestis elegisse certo salvare decrevisse eos omnes qui resipiunt in vera fide filii Dei ex hâc vitâ decedunt It s well known what order King Iames took in his time in the restraint of preaching this doctrine in the Pulpits by any under the degree of a Deane and counselled the States likewise to forbid the preaching of those controversall points amongst them And if it were wisdome in them to take this course without any prejudice to the truth of the doctrine why should Beza's with-holding from conference hereupon be any thing prejudiciall thereto But were there not other causes of moment to move him hereunto which this Author conceales and which Beza proposeth in the first place as namely that the Prince who invited them hereunto in his Letters Missive alleaged no other cause of that meeting but Infaelicem de Coenâ Domini controversiam that unhappy Controversy about the Supper of the Lord. Secondly that their Citties sent them over accordingly to this Conference for no other cause but to conferre thereabours This Iacobus Andreas acknowledgeth and giveth a reason why in those Letters of the Prince there was no mention made of those three Articles whereabout they were afterwards urged to conferre to wit quod illos in istis quoque dissidere non intellexerat Princeps Illustrissimus And thirdly because the Feast of Easter approched and they desired to be at home in their own Citties by that time Lastly doth if follow that because they declined the sifting the truth of these poynts as this Author phraiseth it after such a manner to wit by publique disputation doth it herehence follow that they declined the sifting of it They made this offer to propose their opinion herein and the confirmation of it out of the Word of God in private before the Prince and if Jacobus Andreas were pleased to propose any Theses against it they would take them along with them and upon consideration to addresse a convenient Answer thereunto This Beza sets down in that Preface Let D. Andrews shew if he can saith Beza hanc Christianae doctrinae partem aut à nostris sive scribendo sive concionando praetermissam aut a suis rectius acuratius quà m a nostris pertractatam And truly for my part I no way like such conferences being privy to mine own imperfections as having neither such strength of memory as to command a present use of my knowledge in these poynts upon all occasions nor such command of my passions as to keep them from breaking forth in such sort as might be obnoxious to censures not knowing how I might be provoked but certainly I feare not to come to the examination of any of their Writings or to offer mine own to be examined by any of them One thing I had almost omitted out of Beza in his Preface to the First Part of his Answer to these Acts. It was Beza's motion that all things passing between them on both sides might be set down in writing under the hands of Collators and this course I confesse I could willingly approve of and after this manner to conferre with any But this so faire a motion was rejected by Andreas He would conferre rather by word of mouth then by writing A second motion proposed by Beza was this that what was spoken on both sides might be set down in writing by Notaries chosen and appoynted thereunto by common consent But neither would Andreas admit of this Petivimus saith Beza initio ut utrinque omnia scriptis propria Collocutorum manu subsignatis agerentur Quod cum D. Andreae non placuisset qui verbis agi malebat for the Auditory was very propitious to him for the most part postulavi ut utrinque dicta à probatis utriusque partis consensu delectis Notariis exciperentur quae deinde cuique parti recognoscere addita subscriptione confirmare liceret Haec enim erat profectò justa sincera colloquendi ratio ut sic falsationi occurreretur Quum autem ne hoc quidem admitteret D. Andreas c. Now let any indifferent person that is not sowred with partiall affections judge whose carriage is to be thought in equity more prejudiciall to their cause the carriage of Andreas or the carriage of Beza I come to the Contra-Remonstrants unwillingnesse to conferre upon the poynt of reprobation What their reasons were I know not But this I am sure of the Scripture is free in speaking of election and expresse not so of reprobation leaving us to take notice of the condition of reprobation by its opposition to election And in conformity hereunto both Austin in his time and Remigius in his time and Bradwardine in his time speaks liberally of predestination but very sparingly of reprobation And the doctrine of reprobation as it is nothing lesse mysterious then that of election so it is farre more harsh to carnall affections And it is well known that at the time of the Hague Conference Barnavelt that ruled the rost amongst the States was too great a friend to the Arminian Party But what boldnesse doth this Author take in passing his suspicious censures upon a doctrine because some defenders of it at some time have been loath to come to entertaine a publique Conference thereupon For what argument call you this The Contra-Remonstrants would not be brought to give their reasons on this point therefore the doctrine of Austin delivered 1200 years or thereabouts before concerning the absolutenesse both of Predestination on the one side and of preterition on the other as Vossius acknowledgeth is to be suspended of untruth And if my readinesse to come to the triall hereon doth nothing credit the cause as maintained by others why should others unwillingnesse to come to the same triall be any disparagement to the same cause as it is maintained by me or any other It is well known that Peter Moulin concurring with us in the poynt of absolute predestination maintaines reprobation to proceed upon the divine foresight of finall perseverance in impenitency If this Author differed from us no more the M r Moulin doth and acknowledged the meer pleasure of God in giving grace to whom he will and denying it to whom he will I doe not think any friend of his would think any whit the worse of him or charge him with defection from the truth of God in this Neither can I think that he ever was of any other opinion considering how many worthy Divines opposite to the Arminians doe either conceive or at least seem to conceive that the purpose of God to damne doth presuppose
Jewes trouble our citty and preach Ordinances which are not lawfull for us to receive neither to observe seeing we are Romans And no marvaile if the Devill roares when he falls from heaven like lightning and his kingdome is shaken But because he putts us to it in this crimination I think it fit to give a tast of the violent proceedings in those parts as I find them ordered in the Preface to the Synod Dordrac set forth by the authority of the States And because uproares concern insurrections against government in Church or State The first particular I observe of this nature is Fol. 3. pag. 1. where after Arminius had been much suspected and divers times urged to declare his opinion upon certain poynts which hitherto he had declined saving in a false manner his protestation in the issue proving directly contrary to his practice The Rectors of particular Churches sowred with the leaven of his doctrine openly refuse to subscribe the Confession of the Catechisme though the Synod of South-Holland commanded them Pastores Arminii sententiam amplexi passim in Classibus recusabant mandato Synodi de subscriptione Confession is ac Catecheseos morem gerere Here we have the begining of a manifest schisme Now consider we the progresse hereof Hereupon a resolution was made it being high time by the States for the calling of a Nationall Synode in the yeare 1605. about November 26. the execution whereof was by divers practises of the Arminian Faction delayed and put off from time to time for the space of 13 years Fol. 5. pag. 2. Arminius himselfe acknowledgeth de Heterodoxiâ suâ varios rumores omnes jam ecclesias pervasisse incendiumque à se suscitatum ipsa Ecclesiae tecta super are dici Fol. 8. pag. 1. In the mean time Anno 1608. the States declared their purpose was to call a Provinciall Synode in October following and signification hereof being made the Rectors of particular Congregations as many as were addicted to Arminius being admonished to manifest their considerations in their severall Deanaries that so they might be fairely sent to the Synod that approached They put this off also Illi vero ut antea ita nunc quoque singuli consuetis tergiversationibus pariter hoc detrectarunt The like refusall was afterwards made in the Synod of South-Holland though they were urged by the Synod to declare themselves for as for the Provinciall Synod that was deferred two months longer Whereupon the Synod decreed that they should give up their considerations within a Months space or be obnoxious to Censure Ecclesiasticall Hereupon was means made by Utenbogard for letters from the States unto those Pastors to send up unto them their considerations sealed that so they might reserve them to the Provinciall Synod shortly to be held In these proceedings a man may easily smell Barnavells hand all along Hereupon came forth at length Arminius his Declaration before the States In answer whereunto Gomarus riseth up as there we may read Fol. 6. pag. 2. And amongst other courses of Arminius makes relation of this as how Spretis Synodorum Classium Prebyteriorum judiciis ac decretis ad supremi Magistratus tribunal prima instantia prosiluisse ibique querelas atque accusationes suas adversus Ecclesiarum doctrinam proposuisse artibusque aulicis favorem sibi Ecclesiis verò odium consiliare diligenter studiisse And hereupon besought the States that seeing Contentiones gliscerent Ecclesiae turbarentur Civesque in partes distraherentur the Nationall Synod which they had promised might be gathered together with the first which yet by the practice of Utenbogard and others was still delayed Hereupon Arminius his Faction grew so bold as publiquely to Preach against the received Doctrine as Bertius spared not to declare himselfe but wherein Mark I pray the Article well because this Author drawes all to reprobation Now the Articles whereupon Bertius declared himselfe to differ from the Doctrine received were De justificatione hominis coram Deo De Praedestinatione De Gratiâ Dei libero arbitrio De Perseverantiâ fidelium and upon these very points afterwards proceeded the Conference between Arminus and Gomarus before the States And one Venator spared not publiquely to broach Pelagian and Socinian errours Whereupon he was suspended by the Churches of North-Holland In spite of whom notwithstanding he continued his courses of Preaching Now whereas the Orthodox Pastors in the Deanary of Alomar considering he was lawfully suspended and withall a man of impure life refused to admit him into their company Hereof complaint was made to the States and by Utenbogards practice a Mandate obtained from them that they should admit him Now when the States considering the present exigent were easily like to condescend to a Provinciall Synode the Arminians moved that the Deputies to be sent thither should not be appointed thereunto by the Churches according to the usuall course but only by the States presuming hereby that either none but such as favoured their cause should be sent or at least such as were lesse alienated from their Opinion fol. 8. p. But though they could not effect this yet by their practice it came to passe that the calling not only of a Provinciall Synode but of the yearely Synods were hindered Shortly after this finding what liberty they had they met together of their own accord privily Sine Magistratus Supremi authoritate magno numero Atque ibi inter se initâ per subscriptionem nominum confaederatione seu conspiratione manifestum in Ecclesiis Reformatis Schisma instituunt That year came forth the Remonstrance Upon this by the practice of the Remonstrants Vorstius is brought in to be a Professor in the place of Arminius For as touching the exceptions taken against him the Remonstrants professed before the States he had given them good satisfaction Fol. 10. pag. 2. Then follow their practises for the removing of such Rectors from their Churches as were their opposites and obtruding upon the people such as were of their own Party At Alcmar Adolphus Venator a man of impure life and faith moved the people to Armes against the Magistrate whereby he was driven to relinquish his place and others brought in of Venator his Faction Fol. 12. pag. 1. Hereupon the Elders and Deacons of that place were removed and two Pastors the one having formerly executed his Ministry amongst them for fifty years continuance Grevincovius in like sort with the Magistracy of Rotterdam to deprive his Colleague there Cornelius Geselius of his Ministry first and then by their Sergeants to cast him out of the Citty Utenbogard sends Remonstrants into Utrecht and amongst others Jacobum quendam Taurinum hominem turbulentum saevum Fol. 12. pag. 2. In Gelderland also the ordinary and annuall Synodicall Assemblies were hindred by the practice of Utenbogard like as still they continued withall their art to hinder the calling of a Nationall Synod so often promised by the States and so many years deferred William of Nassau moved
Parentemque caeterorum the Caeteri belike were such spirits as wee call Angells And that Maximi Dei leges were inevitabiles and this was called Necessity and such a Necessity cui ne Deos quidem that is inferior spirits resistere posse Quae verò ab Astris geruntur talia interdum esse ut evitari sapientiâ industriâ labore queant in quo sua est Fortuna Quae verò certis causis progrederentur ac permanerent fixa id dici Fatum quod tamen necessitatem non afferat electioni That the Manichees maintained two supreme and coëternall causes of all things we read the one the cause of Good the other of Evill and that every creature was a substantiall part of one or both and that man in his nature was compounded of both and that his corruption was essentiall from the supream Author of evill and not such as acrewed to him of disobedience We read But of their opinion that all things were determined by them both good and evill I no where read but in this Authors Legend Danaeus hath commented upon Austin de Haeresibus and to every Head of Heresy draws what he hath read thereof in other Authors But I find no mention at all of this Article amongst 21 shamefull errours of theirs which he reckons up The 19 th is this Voluntatem malè agendi quod vocant liberum arbitrium nob is à naturâ ipsâ insitam non rebellione nostrâ accersitam vel ex inobedientiâ natam Quanquam homines propriâ voluntate peccant And where Austin answereth the criminations against the Catholiques made by the Pelagians I find no mention at all of this He should have shewed from whom he takes this that understanding their Opinion aright we might the better judge of the reproachfull comparison which he makes 2 To the consideration of which comparison of his I now addresse my selfe He proposeth two things one whereof he saith must needs be maintained The First whereof is this That all actions naturall and Morall good and evill and all events likewise are absolutely necessary Concerning which I say First I have cause to doubt that this Author understands not aright the very notions of absolute necessity and necessity not absolute There is no greater necessity then necessity of nature And this necessity is twofold either in Essendo in being or in Operando in working God alone is necessary in being and his being is absolutely necessary it being impossible he should not be as not only we believe but Schoole Divines demonstrate and that with great variety of evident and curious conclusions As for the other necessity which is in respect of operation First this is no way incident unto God speaking of operation ad extrà and secluding the mysterious emanations within the Divine Nature such as are the Generation of the Sonne by the Father and the wonderfull Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne But ad extra this necessity of operation is only found in the creature and that only in such creatures as by necessity of nature are determined one way as fire to burne heavy things to move downwards and light things upwards the Sunne Moone and starres to give light and the heavens to turne round all naturall Agents in a word distinct from rationall are thus determined to wit to work that whereunto they are inclined by necessity of nature but yet so that being finite they are subject to superiour powers and thereby obnoxious to impediment most of them even to powers create all of them to power increate Whence it comes passe that no work of theirs is absolutely necessary especially in respect of God who can either set an end to all when he will or restraine their operations at his pleasure We know the Three Noble Children when they came forth of the fiery oven had not so much as any smell of the fire upon them And therefore Durand professeth that these things which are commonly accounted to come to passe most necessarily doe indeed come to passe meerely contingently in respect of the will of God Neverthelesse we willingly professe that upon supposition of the will of God that this or that shall come to passe it followeth necessarily that such a thing shall come to passe like as upon supposition that God knowes such a thing shall come to passe it followeth necessarily that such a thing shall come to passe but how not necessarily but either necessarily according as some things are brought to passe by naturall agents working necessarily after the manner aforesaid or contingently and freely according as some things are brought to passe by rationall agents working contingently and freely And therefore as touching the Question of the Schooles about the root of contingency Aquinas and Scotus concurre in resolving it into the Will of God but with this difference Scotus relates it into the will of God as a free agent Aquinas resolves it into the Will of God as an efficacious agent For the will of God is so efficacious that he can effectually procure both that things necessary shall be brought to passe necessarily and things contingent contingently and according he hath provided congruous causes hereof to wit both agents naturall for the produceing of necessary things necessarily and agents rationall for the producing of contingent things contingently and freely Thus God preordained that Josias should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar that Cyrus should proclaim liberty to the Jewes to returne into their Country yet what sober Divine hath made doubt whether Josias and Cyrus did not herein that which they did freely And as in doing so in abstaining from doing For God ordained that Christs bones should not be broken as also that when the Jewes all the Males came up to the Lord thrice in the year to Jerusalem None of their neighbours should desire their land Exod. 34. 24. Yet what sober man should make question whether the Souldiers did non as freely abstaine from breaking Christs bones as from ought else and so likewise the bordering Nations did as freely abstaine from invading the land of Israel And how often is this phrase used in Scripture Necesse est of some things coming to passe which yet came to passe as contingently and freely as ought else And unlesse this be granted that Gods determination is nothing prejudiciall to the freedome of the creatures will either we must deny faith and repentance to be the gifts of God or that they are works produced freely and so every action pleasing in the sight of God For the Scripture expressely professeth that God it is who worketh in us every thing that is pleasing in his sight And whatsoever God workes in us or bestows upon us in time the same he determined to work in us and to bestow upon us from everlasting For he worketh all things according to the counsell of his will Ephes 1. 11. and the counsell of his Will was everlasting it being the same with God
death upon a sinner of meere pleasure but being provoked thereunto and that according to the purport of the first place Ezech 18. by the sinner himselfe and also according to the purport of the second place only in case of impenitency And I concurre with him in this And so I conceive it to be delivered in the same sense with that Lament 3. 32 33. For though he cause griefe to wit by reason of mens sinnes v. 39. yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies to wit in case he repents Ier. 18. 7. Iudg. 10. 16. For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men Mark I pray not willingly to wit in as much as he is provoked thereunto by sinne and by refusall to repent And this is in the former Scripture phrases not to take pleasure in the afflicting and grieving of men For if any work be such as wherein pleasure is taken we need not enquire after a cause why it is done but though no pleasure be taken in it yet for some benefit redounding thereby a man may doe it yea though it be grievous and bitter unto him As a sick man is willing to take a bitter potion for the recovery of his health Now come we to the argument God takes no pleasure in the death of any therefore he doth not of pleasure inflict death We willingly grant it in as much as he never inflicts eternall death on any that doth not dye in sinne unrepented of And as he doth not inflict death on any of meere pleasure that is without just cause on the part of him that dyeth deserving it So we willingly confesse that God did never decree to inflict death on any without just cause on the Malefactors part deserving death And this is the uttermost whereunto this Authors argument can be extended And all our Divines unanimously confesse that God neither decreed to damne any man of his meer pleasure but for his sinne wherein he died without repentance 3. Observe the cunning of this Disputer to deceive himselfe first and then to abuse his readers For whereas he should have proceeded in his argument by degrees thus God hath no pleasure in the death of a sinner therefore he doth not of his own pleasure inflict death and thence proceed if he had thought good to conclude the like of Gods decree thus if God doth not of his ownpleasure inflict then neither doth he of his own pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation This author leaping over the inflicting of death as a block in his way for the last consequence would have betrayed its own nakednesse flyeth at first to the application of it to Gods decree Now I willingly grant that Gods having no pleasure in the death of a sinner doth signify that God inflicts death on no man without a cause for that were of meer pleasure to inflict But dares he herehence inferre therefore God doth not of meer pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation on man for sinne for to this alone comes all the force of this argument Now to shew the vanity of this consequence consider I pray 1. It is as if he should argue thus in plain termes sinne is alwaies the meritorious cause of damnation therefore sinne is the meritorious cause of Gods eternall decree of damnation Now this Enthymeme hath no force any farther then it may be reduced into a Categoricall Syllogisme and this Enthymeme is reducible into no other Syllogisme then this Damnation is the decree of Damnation sinne is the cause of Damnation therefore sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But in this Syllogisme the proposition containes a notorious untruth Or thus Sinne is the cause of damnation therefore the foresight of sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But this Enthymeme is not reducible unto any categoricall Syllogisme at all for as much as it consists of foure termes all which must be clapt into the Syllogisme whereunto it is reduced and consequently make that Syllogisme consist of foure termes which utterly overthrowes the illative forme thereof 2. We may as well dispute thus Good works as well as faith and repentance are the disposing cause unto salvation therefore good works as well as faith and repentance or the foresight of them are the disposing cause to Gods election or to the decree of salvation But shall I tell you the chiefe flourish whereupon this Author and usually the Arminians doth insist in this his loose argumentation I conceive it to be this they hope their credulous readers unexpert in distinguishing between Gods eternall decree and the temporall execution thereof will be apt hereupon to conceit that we maintain that God doth not only of meer pleasure decree whatsoever he decreeth but also that he doth decree of meer pleasure to damne men which yet is utterly contrary if I be not deceived to the tenet of all our Divines all concurring in this that God in the execution of the decree of damnation proceeds according to a Law and not in the execution of reprobation only but also in the execution of election And the law is this Whosoever believes shall be saved whosoever believes not shall be damned And like as he inflicteth not damnation but by way of punishment so he conferres not salvation but by way of reward But in the execution of his decrees of election unto grace and reprobation from grace we willingly professe that God proceeds according to no law given unto men to prepare themselves hereunto but meerly according to his good pleasure having mercy on whom he will and hardning whom he will And this indeed is the criticall poynt of this controversy But neither this Author nor his complices some of them of my knowledge have any heart to deale on this I come to his Second pregnant place as he calleth it DISCOURSE SECT II. GOD hath shut up all in unbeliefe that he might have mercy on all Rom. 11. 32. in these words of the Apostle are two all 's of equall extent the one standing just against the other an all of unbelievers and an all of objects of mercy look how many unbelievers there be on so many hath God a will of shewing mercy And therefore if all men of all sorts and conditions and every man in every sort be an unbeliever then is every man of every condition under mercy And if every man be under mercy then there is no antecedent precise will in God of shutting up some and those the most from all possibility of obtaining mercy for these two are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they cannot stand together TWISSE Consideration I Willingly grant the word all in each place is of equall extent but how in the Apostles meaning in this place that is look in what sense the Apostle takes the word all when he saith God hath concluded all under unbeliefe in the same sense he takes the word all when he sayeth that he might have mercy
themselves God took not that pleasure in them as to give them his custodient grace to keep them from withdrawing themselves which grace and that out of his good pleasure he afforded unto others But this grace comes in no account throughout with this Author like unto the Remonstrants who would have no other notice taken of any other counsell of God then that whereby he decreeth to save believers and damne unbelievers But if you call them to enquire of Gods decree to bestow the grace of Faith and repentance upon some and not on others as whether it proceeds absolutely or conditionally they usually lend a deafe eare to this whereby it is as cleare as the Sunne what estimation they make of the grace of regeneration of the grace of Faith and of repentance and after what manner they give God the glory of it By the way observe I pray how he makes the state of man in being a reprobate consequent to his withdrawing himselfe which undoubtedly is a Temporall act and accordingly the act of Reprobation whereby a man is denominated a reprobate to be meerely Temporall and consequently such an act must election be also viz. not eternall but Temporall Still he keepeth himselfe in his strength of confusion as most advantageous for him as in saying God forsakes no man till by actuall sinnes and continuance in them he forsaketh God But albeit God forsaketh no man as touching the inflicting of punishment untill man commits actuall sinne and continueth therein impenitently yet before this God did forsake him as touching the denyall of this grace custodient from sinne and the denyall of the grace of repentance to rise out of sinne which yet he grants to many as in shewing mercy to whom he will like as whom he will he hardneth and so accordingly cures in some that naturall infidely and hardnesse of heart wherein we are all borne and leaves it uncured in others Now consider we his argument following which is this If God reject no man from salvation in time or in act and deed till he reject God then surely he rejected no man in purpose and decree but such a one as he foresaw would reject and cast off God Now this argument not one of our Divines deny not only as it is applied to reprobation but neither doe we deny it applied unto election For we willingly professe that like as God bestowes salvation on none but such as he then findes believers penitent and given to good works in like sort wee all professe that God decrees to bestow salvation on none but such as he foreseeth will believe repent and become studious of good works Like enough many doe wilfully dissemble the true state of the Question between us others ignorantly mistake it The question is not whether God decrees to bestow salvation on such as he foreseeth will believe and reject those from salvation whom he foreseeeth will not believe but of the order of reason between these decrees of God and the foresight of obedience the one side and disobedience on the other that is whether like as faith repentance and good works in men of ripe years doe precede their salvation as disposing causes thereunto so the fore-sight of faith repentance and good works precede election as disposing causes or prerequisites thereunto In like manner on the other side whether as finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So finall perseverance in sinne as foreseen by God precedes reprobation as the decree of Damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So that the argument here mentioned which is all his strength in this place rightly applyed must runne thus Faith repentance and good works actually existent precede salvation as the disposing causes thereunto therefore faith repentance and good works foreseen precede election as the disposing causes thereunto and what is this but as good as in expresse termes to professe that election is of faith repentance and good works though it be in direct contradiction unto Saint Paul professing in terminis to speak in this Divines language that the purpose of God according to election is not of works So on the other side Finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof therefore finall perseverance in sinne foreseen precedes the decree of damnation as the meritorious cause thereof And then what is to make reprobation to be of evill works if this be not Whereas Saint Paul look by what arguments he proves that election is not of good works viz. because before Jacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said of them the Elder shall serve the Younger by the same argument it is equally evident that Reprobation is not of evill works Yet we acknowledge an exact conformity between Gods decrees and the execution thereof because like as God damnes no man but for sinne so he decreed to damne no man but for sinne where sinne is in each place made the meritorious cause of damnation not of the decree of damnation And like as God bestowes salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works so he decreed to bestow salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works where faith repentance and good works are in each place made the disposing causes to salvation but not to election There was never any so madde saith Aquinas as to say that merits are the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating and Why but because so is the cause of predestination to be enquired into as the cause of Gods will is enquired into but formerly he had shewed that there can be no cause of Gods will as touching the act of God willing Now let every one judge whether the act of reprobation be not as clearly the act of Gods will as the act of predestination and consequently whether it be not equally as mad a course in Aquinas his judgement to devise a cause of reprobation as to devise a cause of predestination on the part of Gods will And no marvail for the act of Gods will is eternall all the works of the creature are temporall Then the act of Gods will is God himselfe for there is no accident in God and therefore they may as well set themselves to devise a cause of God as a cause of Gods will His phrase of casting off is ambiguous if it signifieth the denyall of salvation it followeth disobedience if it signifieth the deniall of grace it precedes disobedience in what kind soever 3. Our velle and facere are both temporall in God it is otherwise for his deeds are temporall and may admit the works of men precedaneous thereunto but his resolutions are his decrees and they are all eternall and can admit no work of man precedaneous thereunto yet is God as just in the one as in the other For like as he damnes no man but for
another man made theirs only By Gods order and pleasure 2. In their inevitable destination to destruction under a shew of the contrary The Devills as they are decreed to damnation so they know it they expect it they look for no other but men even those that are appoynted unto wrath are yet fed up with hopes of Salvation and made to believe that the whole businesse is put into their hands so as that if they doe perish it is not defectu misericordiae because God hath no mercy on them but defeclu voluntatis propriae because they will not be saved when yet there is no such mercy Now if it be worse to be deluded in misery then simply to be miserable then the condition of men in this respect is made by this decree to be worse then the state of Devills 3. In their obligation to believe and the aggravation of their punishment by not believing The Devills because they must be damned are not commanded to believe in Christ nor is their punishment encreased by not believing but poore men who by this decree can scape Hell no more then the Devills must yet be tied to believe in Christ and must have their torments encreased if they believe not These things being so I think I may conclude that this decree of absolute reprobation overthrowes the mercy of God in generall and toward mankind Nor doth that quiet my mind which is usually answered to these objections viz. That God by this decree doth fully manifest his justice and his mercy too his justice towards the Reprobates and his mercy toward the chosen vessells and that it is necessary that his decrees shall be so ordered as that both these may be clearly manifested by them This I say doth not satisfy for 1. Gods mercy is revealed to be rich mercy abundant long suffering beyond apprehension and surmounting his justice in its objects and expressions Now such a mercy as this set forth with such glorious titles cloathed with such lovely properties and exceeding the ability of any mans conception such a mercy I say is not manifested by this decree 2. Neither is the pure and spotlesse justice of God set forth by this absolute decree as I now come to shew this being my second argument drawn from the Attributes of God against absolute reprobation TWISSE Consideration HEre we have a great deale of noyse and the most wastfull discourse that ever I yet met withall in the enlarging of a most hungry argument the answer whereunto himselfe perceives and sets down as he thinks good in a few words after three large leaves spent in the enlarging of his opposition namely to this effect that whatsoever he can say in the advancing of Gods mercy we willingly acknowledge but withall we say this mercy of God which makes God so glorious is peculiarly manifested towards the vessells of mercy whom God hath prepared unto glory in distinction from the vessells of wrath as we read Rom. 9. 23. and that in a higher degree then he hath mentioned this being one speciall end why God suffereth with long patience the vessells of wrath prepared to destruction Rom. 9. 22. namely That he might declare the riches of his glory upon the vessells of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory v. 23. And after so much froth of words spent to no purpose unlesse to beguile his reader and dull him with verbosity that he might not attend and observe how accurately he performes in the issue that which he intends Consider I beseech you what a meager and starveling reply he puts to this Gods mercy saith he is revealed to be rich mercy abundant long suffering beyond apppehension we grant all this and adde that it is glorious also and makes the partakers of it to rejoyce with joy unspeakable and glorious but this belongs only to them that believe and to certain who are called vessells of mercy in distinction from vessells of wrath Rom. 9. 22 23. which vessells of mercy in distinction from vessells of wrath must needs be the elect only in distinction from Reprobates with what face can he deny that such a mercy is manifested on the Elect by our Doctrine 2. I farther adde that such a mercy is not manifested by his Doctrine as by ours for the glory of Gods mercy consists in this that it is of free grace pardoning our sinnes regenerating us changing our hearts giving faith and repentance to some when he denies it to others all this I say is of meere grace by our Doctrine without respect to any preparation or qualification in man according to that of the Apostle He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth this is not their Doctrine if it were I see no cause of any materiall difference between us 3. And I find it strange that men should grow to such a degree of immodesty as to affect singularity and to shew a dexterity in such sort to advance Gods mercy as to obscure and deface his grace as this Author doth for all along you shall not find him to magnify Gods free grace whereas Mercy shewed to one rather then to another in respect of his being better disposed for the receiving of it more then another is rather of the nature of justice then of Mercy distinct from justice 4. And to this purpose he takes no pains to set down wherein this mercy consists which he so much amplifies but carryeth it throughout in hugger mugger and in the clouds of generality that it might appeare the more likely to be indifferently extended to all and albeit sometimes he expresseth it to be the love of a Father towards his children yet it is too too probable that he extends this to all and every one as the children of God by creation And therefore particulates not wherein it consists as namely whether in mercy temporall or spirituall and as touching mercy spirituall whether this be not the pardoning of mens sinnes together with the illumination of the mind sanctification of the will change of the heart and giving of faith repentance obedience and finall perseverance therein For had he particulated those he had apparently marred his own market and been driven to loose that in retaile which he hoped to gaine in grosse For these mercies are not extended to all But their meaning is God offers these to all and that any faile of them it is because man disposeth not himselfe for the receiving of them This is the issue of his advancing Gods mercy utterly to disparage the freedome of Gods grace Now of the Divine mercy in this sense to wit as freely extended to all he hath not one word throughout as I can remember in so vast premises all that he speaks of the extention of Gods mercy to variety of objects is dispatched in three lines of these his three large leaves as where he saith his mercy is more largely extended then his justice and that look how much three or foure come short
repentance on whom he will because he finds all equall in naturall corruption and no difference in any whereby to move God to bestow grace on him rather then on another The case is not alike when God comes to bestow salvation and inflict damnation for some he finds dying in sinnes others dying in the Lord yet we deny not but by power absolute and secluding the determination of his own will he could annihilate the righteous as well as the wicked In like sort the whole course of nature depends meerely upon the pleasure of God yet we say it is naturall for a Leprous person to beget a Leprous person and so as naturall it is for that which is borne of the flesh to be flesh though each depends upon the constitution of God For albeit Adam lost the spirit of God by his transgression and all supernaturall graces wherewith he was endued yet like as God by regeneration of his meere pleasure restored them afterwards to Adam and in due time doth restore them to every one of his Elect so in their very conception if it pleased God he could for Christs sake infuse them notwithstanding the sinne of Adam and consequently it is the free act of God in refusing after this manner to deale with them Yet this nothing hinders but that the propagation of spirituall corruption unto all Adams posterity may be as naturall as the propagation of any hereditary disease from the Father to the child and over and above that it is not in the way of meer pleasure but in the way of justice for the sinne of Adam which was the sinne of our nature bereaving him of that originall righteousnesse wherein he was â—reated and causing all mankind to be 1. Derived from him whereas he could have otherwise provided 2. And that from Adam after his nature was corrupt with sinne whereas he could have derived posterity from him before his fall had it pleased him And therefore I approve the second Canon of the Synod of Dort whereunto our English Divines with many others subscribed where they professe that the corruption derived from Adam to his posterity was per vitiosae naturae propagationem justo Dei iudicio derivata This I take to be much different from saying Adams sinne is made ours by meer pleasure or by imputation only So the fifteenth Article in the confession Ecclesiarum Belgicarum runs thus Credimus Adami in obedientiâ peccatum originis in totum genus humanum diffusum esse quod est totius naturae corruptio vitium haereditarium quo ipsi infantes in matris suae utero polluti sunt quodque veluti radix omne peccatorum genus in homine producit ideoque ita foedum execrabile est coram Deo ut ad generis humani condemnationem sufficiat Our Brittain Divines in their second Thesis upon the third and fourth Articles explicate themselves concerning the condition of originall sinne in this manner Lapsae voluntati inest non tantum peccandi possibilitas sed etiam praeceps ad peccandum inclinatio Nec aliter se potest res habere in homine corrupto nondum per divinam justitiam restaurato cùm ea sit natura voluntatis ut nuda manere nequeat sed ab uno cui adhaeserat objecto excidens aliud quaerat quod cupidè amplectatur ideo per spontaneam defectionem habitualiter adversa a Deo creatore in creaturam effraeni impetu fertur ac cum ea libidinose ac turpiter fornicatur semper avida fruendi utendis ac vetita moliendi ac patrandi Quid mirum ergo si talis voluntas sit Diaboli maneipium I find indeed in Corvinus such a profession of his namely that ex puro Dei arbitrio qui Adami peccatum nobis imputare voluit etiam in nos reatus derivatus est And Walaeus in answer unto him writes thus Nec quinto illo ad Rom. Capite ad quod nos hic Corvinus remittit quicquam tale dicitur aut innuitur nempe quod ex mero Dei arbittio pendeat haec primi peccati imputatio 2. The Second thing he puts upon our Divines is That God hath determined for that sinne to cast away the farre greater part of mankind for ever and so they make God to doe that by two acts the one accompanying the other which the other say he did by one To which I answer First that if they say that God doth no more by two acts then the other say God did by one seeing I have proved that the other doe no way maintain that God doth punish the righteous with the wicked which is his immodest and unshamefac't crimination no nor doe they maintain that God determined to damne any but for sinne and which is more then that supposing humanum genus nondum conditum to be the object of reprobation yet doth it not follow that in any moment of nature the decree of damnation is before the consideration of sinne surely neither will it follow by the Sublapsarian Doctrine that God doth not decree to punish any man with damnation but for those sinnes wherein he dyeth unrepented of much lesse that God doth punish the righteous with the wicked which is the crimination of this Author proposed I doubt against his own conscience T is true some perish only in originall sinne and that justly for if they be borne children of wrath is it strange if they dye children of wrath And is it not just with God to inflict eternall death on them whom this Author professeth to be guilty of eternall death only he saith that God of his meer pleasure makes them guilty of eternall death That is his saying not ours For though we say originall sinne makes a man guilty of eternall death by the free constitution of God yet we say not that this free constitution of God was made of his meer pleasure but justo Dei judicio like as whosoever believes not shall be damned here damnation is by the free constitution of God made the portion of unbelievers but dares this Author inferre herehence that it is not made so justo Dei judicio indeed God gives grace according to the meere pleasure of his will but no wise man will say that he damnes men according to the meere pleasure of his will for this phrase implies that there is no cause thereof on mans part And indeed there is no cause on mans part why God should give him grace but there is cause enough on mans part why God should inflict damnation on him and yet this work of God though just is never a whit the lesse free So in damning for originall sinne only though Gods constitution hereof be just yet is it never a whit the lesse free and though it be free yet it is never a whit the lesse just And like as damnation is inflicted on finall impenitents sola Dei constitutione only by vertue of this constitution Divine whosoever repents not of his sinne shall be
all causes meritorious If it be farther said that not so much the foresight of sin as to speak more properly sinne foreseen is the cause of reprobation I reply against it in this manner sinne foreseen doth suppose Gods decree to permit sinne and consequently if sinne foreseene be before reprobation then also the decree of permitting sinne is before the decree of reprobation that is the decree of damning for sinne But this cannot be as I endeavour to prove by two reasons The first is this There is no order in intentions but between the intention of the end and the intention of the means and the order is this that the intention of the end is before the intention of the means Therefore if the decree of permitting sinne be before the decree of damning for sinne the decree of permitting sinne must be the intention of the end and the decree of damning for sinne must be the intention of the meanes But this is notoriously untrue For it is apparent that damnation tends not to the permission of sinne as the end thereof for if it did then men were damned to this end that they might be permitted to sinne But far more likely it is that sinne should be permitted to this end that a man might be damned which yet by no means doe I a vouch other reasons I have to shew the vanity of this argumentation I rather professe that permssion of sinne and damnation are not subordinate as end means but coordinate both being means tending joyntly to a farther end which under correction from understandings purged from prejudice and false principles I take to be the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice vindicative 2. My second reason is if permission of sinne be first in intention and then damnation it followes that permission of sinne should be last in execution but this is most absurd namely that a man should be first damned and then suffered to sinne 2. My second principall argument is this Reprobation as it signifies Gods decree is the act of Gods will now the act of Gods will is the very will of God and the will of God is Gods essence and like as there can be no cause of Gods essence so there can be no cause of Gods will or of the act thereof Upon some such arguments as these Aquinas disputes that the predestination of Christ cannot be the cause of our Predestination adding that they are one act in God And when he comes to the resolution of the question he grants all as touching actum volentis that the one cannot be the cause of the other But only quoad praedestinationis terminum which is grace and glory or the things predestinated Christ is the cause of them but not of our predestination as touching the act of God predestinating And I think I may be bold to presume that Christs merits are of as great force to be the cause why God should elect man unto salvation as mans sinnes are of force to be the cause why God should reprobate him unto damnation The same Aquinas a tall fellow as touching Scolasticall argumentation hath professed that no man hath been so mad as to say that merits are the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis and why but because there can be no cause on mans part of the will of God quoad actum volentis Now reprobation is well knowne to be the will of God as well as election and therefore no cause can there be on mans part thereof quoad actum reprobantis And it is well knowne there is a predestination unto death as well as unto life and consequently t is as mad a thing in his judgement to maintaine that merits are the cause there of quoad actum praedestinantis God by efficacious grace could breake off any mans infidelity if it pleased him that is by affording him such a motion unto faith as he foresaw would be yeelded unto this is easily proved by the evident confession of Arminius formerly specified Now Why doth God so order it as to move some in such a manner as he foresees they will believe others in such a māner as he foresees they will not believe but because his purpose is to manifest the glory of his grace in the salvation of the one and the glory of his justice in the damnation of the other Herein I appeale to the judgement and conscience of every reasonable creature that understands it in spight of all prejudice and false principles to corrupt him 4. In saying sinne foreseen is the cause of Gods decree of damnation they presuppose a prescience of sinne as of a thing future without all ground For nothing can be foreknown as future unlesse it be future now these disputers presuppose a futurition of sinne and that from eternity without all ground For consider no sinne is future in its own nature for in its own nature it is meerely possible and indifferent as well not to be future as to become future and therefore it cannot passe out of the condition of a thing meerely possible into the condition of a thing future without a cause Now what cause doe these men devise of the futurition of sinne Extra Deum nothing can be the cause thereof For this passage of things out of the condition of things possible into the condition of things future was from everlasting for from everlasting they were future otherwise God could not have known them from everlasting And consequently the cause of this passage must be acknowledged to have been from everlasting and consequently nothing without God could be the cause of it seeing nothing without God was from everlasting Therefore the cause hereof must be found intra Deum within God then either the will of God which these men doe utterly disclaime or the knowledge of God but that is confessed to presuppose things future rather then to make them so or the essence of God now that may be considered either as working necessarily and if in that manner it were the cause of things future then all such things should become future by necessity of nature which to say is Atheisticall or as working freely and this is to grant that the will of God is the cause why every thing meerely possible in its own nature doth passe from everlasting into the condition of a thing future if so be it were future at all And indeed seeing no other cause can be pitched upon this free will of God must be acknowledged to be the cause of it And consequently the reason why every thing becomes future is because God hath determined it shall come to passe but with this difference All good things God hath determined shall come to passe by his effection All evill things God hath determined shall come to passe by his permission And the Scripture naturally affords plentifull testimony to confirme this without forcing it to interpretations congruous hereunto upon presumptuous grounds that these arguments proceed from
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
the decision whereof carryeth with it the decision of all the rest this Author should unshamefacedly decline it But some there be that hate the light because their workes are evill but doth it become him to taxe others for declining the triall when none sheweth more vile carriage this way then himselfe What that Privy-Councellor was I know not nor have I any evidence of the truth of the story but as it lyeth dictated at pleasure I have shewed how it nothing disadvantageth our cause though the Author of that speech were not only a Privy-Councellor but a great Divine too Yet amongst many good there might be some bad in Queen Elizabeths dayes If that were true which is reported to have been mentioned by D r Lively in a Lecture of his in Cambridge namely that a certaine Booke was found under a Privy-Councellors pillow whose inscription was this De tribus Mundi impostoribus Mose Christo Mahumite As for fate stoicall to give the Divell his right I no where find it maintained by any of them so as to prejudice mens wills but by many great ones I find this expresly denyed and hereof I have already spoken more at large Still he keepes his course in impugning an absolute decree determining mens ends precisely What secret misteries he conceales in the Word precisely I know not but it is aparent we maintaine no such determining the Salvation of any man so as to exclude a Godly life We both know and teach that without Holinesse as much as to say without a Godly life no man shall see God But we further say that this is not wholy the decree of predestination though this Author with his Remonstrants would faine rest here but we farther say that a Godly life is the gift of Gods grace and that God bestowes this gift on whom he will but this Author hath no great lust to oppose us here The more Equivocall a phraise is the fitter it is to serve his turne that lyes upon advantages to promote error and obscure truth And therefore keepes himselfe to the absolute decree and precise determinations either not understanding or not considering that an absolute decree may be takendivers waies either quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing or quoad res volitas as touching the things willed the decree properly signifies the act of God willing but this Author in consideratly takes it quoad res volitas as touching the things willed all along as appeares by his oppossing it to decree or will conditionall And will conditionall with him is such as when the thing willed is not effected because the condition is not performed They are his owne words in the last Section save one of his former sorts of reasons the very last words As for example the will of Saving men is not accomplished because men doe not believe Then as touching the things willed Gods decrees being considered here also arise different considerations for as much as the things willed are different Grace and Glory As for Glory and Salvation we doe not say that God hath decreed to confer that absolutly but only conditionally yet thereupon he stiks throughout supposing his adversaries to maintaine an absolute decree concerning the conferring of Salvation abolutely which is most untrue wherein he fights without any adversary yet there he dischargeth himselfe very strenuously and layes about him like a mad man But as for grace to wit the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance this we readily professe that God doth bestow it absolutly to wit on whom he will according to the meere pleasure of his will All this It is the glory of this Author in his discourse most juditiously to confound which made him the more to abound in matter that he might seem to say some thing when indeed it is nothing supple to the purpose And to meet with him in every particular of his conclusion The events to wit of Salvation or damnation are not at all decreed by God to come to passe absolutely but meerely conditionally and consequently not unavoydably but avoydably rather like as things that come to passe contingently doe come to passe with a possibility not to come to passe and accordingly God decreed they should came to passe contingently And consequently mens actions hereabouts are not unprofitable nay they are both necessary for obtayning the ends here intimated such as never faile of obtayning them As for example Sanctification of the spirit and faith of the truth never faile of procuring Salvation for as much as God ordained by these meanes to bring men unto Salvation 2 Thess 2. 13. And by no meanes else And therefore most absurd it is to conceive that the practise of Godlinesse proves unprofitable and from such wild promises the unprofitable nature of the prctise of Godlinesse can prove no better then a wild conclusion I come to his two witnesses the first is Calv. Inst l. 3. c. 23. sect 14. Si quis ita plebem compellet si non creditis ideo fit quia jam divinitus exitio destinati estis is non modo ignaviam fovet sed indulget malitiae This saith this Author is as much to say as this If a man should set downe the doctrine of Reprobation in its colours and explaine it to people in a cleare and lively fashion he would hereby open a doore to liberty and prophanenesse Now this Calvin delivereth as out of Austin as appeareth both by his entrance hereunto and by his shutting up of it His entrance into it is this Et tamen ut singulare aedificationis studium sancto viro fuit that is Austin sic docendi veri rationem temperat ut prudenter caveatur quoad licet offensio Nam iquae vere dicuntur congruenter simul posse dici admonet The man he speakes of still is Austin as is apparent to him that shall consider the coherence of this Section with the former Then he sets downe the inconvenient manner of Preaching this truth as Austin doth though not in Austins words but in his owne Si quis ita plebem compellet si non creditis ideo fit quia jam divinitus exitio destinati estis c. And shutting the whole up he expressely names Austin misliking such manner of Preaching thus Tales itaque Augustinus non immerito tanquam vel insulsos Doctores vel sinistros ominosos Prophetas ab Ecclesia jubet facessere What is the mystery then of this that Calvin is here brought in for a witnesse in making a relation of Austins discourse and Austin himselfe whose judgement Calvin doth but relate is pretermitted especially considering that Austins testimony where it serves his turne would give farre more credit to his cause then Calvins you will give me leave to guesse at the mistery which I take to be this Calvin is well known to be opposite unto him in the doctrine of reprobation but Calvin acknowledging that this Doctrine might be delivered in a harsh
God that is not yet regenerated but yet neverthelesse they may be in good time Yet here also there is some defect for want of cleare explication of this truth For will you conclude hence that non-regeneration is the cause of infidelity as some doe in effect Why but this is either notoriously false or if true it is true in such a sense as whereby God is no more the cause thereof then a Physitian is the cause of a disease because he will not cure it For infidelity is a naturall fruit of mans hereditary corruption and God alone can cure it but if he will not God is not to be said to be the cause of any disobedience issuing therefrom otherwise then per modum non removentis by way of not removing the cause of it or per modum non dantis quod prohiberet by way of not curing the cause that is by not giving faith Now what harshnesse there is in this to as many as doe not concurre with the Pelagians so as in plain termes to professe that Grace is given according to mens works And the objection framed against Austin and grounded upon that doctrine which he acknowledged ranne thus Caeteri qui in peccatorum delectatione remoramini ideo nondum surrexistis quia nec dum vos adjutorium gratiae miserantis erexit Therefore you are not risen out of that delight you took in sinne because the succour of Gods grace hath not raised you not as Calvin expresseth it Therefore you believe not because ye are ordained to destruction And this very doctrine as formerly I said our Saviour spares not to apply to some particular persons and Preach it to their faces like as Moses Preacheth the very same doctrine to the Children of Israel Deut. 29. 2 3 4. Yet Austin to prevent harshnesse doth not like this manner of proposing it so well seeing it may be and it is fit it should be delivered coveniently thus Si qui autem ad huc in peccatorum damnabilium delectatione remoramini apprehenditis saluberrimam disciplinam Quod tamen cum feceritis nolite extolli quasi de operibus vestris aut gloriari quasi non acceperitis If any of you doe yet continue in the delightfull course of damnable sinnes take hold of wholesome discipline which when you have done be not proud thereof as of your own work or Glory as if you had not received this grace of God Now what advantagious service this first witnesse hath done him I am well content the indifferent may judge I come to his second witnesse that is of the Land-grave of Turing reported by Hesterbachius as I remember it is about the Twelfth Century of yeares since our Saviours incarnation This man being admonished by his friends of his dangerous and vitious courses made this answer Si praedestinatus sum nulla peccata poterunt mihi Regnum Caelorum auferre Si praescitus nulla bona mihi illud valebunt conferre It is not the first time I have met with this story not in Vossius only but in an Arminian Manuscript it seems they make some account of it yet I see no cause they should make any such account thereof It is the common voyce of prophane persons corrupting the doctrine of Predestination to serve their own turnes My selfe remember an instance of it in my minority when I was little more then a child and I remember both the Person whom and the place where it was delivered and it was accounted as a signe of a prophane heart yet this Vossius makes use of as an instance forsooth of a Predestination Heretique And I wonder why they doe not devise as well a Praescientiarian Heresy and that by as good an instance as this of one of Austins Monkes who being reproved by his brethren made the like answer as touching Gods praescience but yet with more sobriety saying Whatsoever I am now I shall be such as God foreseeth I will be Yet herein as Austin professeth he spake nothing but truth but the saying of the Landgrave implyes a notorious untruth namely that if he were predestinated he should be Saved though he continued in his sinfull courses Now this I say is a grosse untruth For predestination is the preparation of Grace as Austin desineth it and consequently such as are predestinated shall be taken off from their sinfull courses in good time and by Grace be brought unto Salvation In like sort he supposeth a Reprobate may be truly righteous whereas Austin professeth of such as are not predestinate that God brings none of them to wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby man is reconciled unto God in Christ what patience soever he affords them Contr. Jul. Pelag. l. 5. c. 4. Nay this kind of Argumentation drawn from destiny Stoicall wherewith our adversaries doe usually reproach our doctrine of Predestination like as the Pelagians did in the same manner reproach Saint Austins doctrine concerning Predestination I say this argument was in course and profligated in the daies of Cicero and censured as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an idle argumentation as before I mentioned and it is to be seen in Cicero his book De Fato and thereupon they distinguished of some things which they called Fatalia as victory and some things which they called Confatalia as all necessary meanes requisite to the getting of the victory And Origen though he be accounted a favourer of our adversaries Doctrine in his writings yet he shewes the vanitie of this Argument applyed to fate wherby undoubtedly he meanes providence divine For he proposeth such a kind of objection as if a sicke man should dispute himself from taking Physick after this maner Either by destiny is it appointed I shall recover or no If my destiny be to recover I shall recover though I use no Physicke if my destiny be not to recover all the Physitians in the world shal doe me no good And the vanity of this is represented by the like argument in another manner thus If it be thy desteny to beget children whether thou usest the company of Woemen or no thou shalt beget children And concludes thus Ut enim hic si fieri non potest ut quis procreat nisi cum muliere concubuerit sic si valetudinis recuperatio medicinae via efficitur necessariò adhibetur medicus The Greeke of Origen is set downe at large by Turnebus in his disputation upon Cicero his book De Fato against Ramus Now judge you I pray what colour of detriment to Religion hath he produced from our doctrine of absolute Reprobation and whether his discourse herein is any better then the imagination of a vaine thing DISCOURSE SECT IV. BUt there are two things chiefly which are said for the vindicating of this opinion from this crimination 1. First that many of them which believe and defend this opinion are Godly and holy men and therefore it doth not of it selfe open a way to liberty but through the wickednesse of men who pervert the
sweetest and the surest truths revealed in Gods word to their own damnation Resp It cannot I confesse be denyed that many of this opinion are Godly men but it is no thankes to their opinion that they are so the true and naturall genius of which is to breed sloth to drowne men in carnall security and to countenance carnall liberty but to some thing else either to Gods providence who will not suffer this doctrine for his own glory and the good of men to have any great stroake in their lives or to mens incogitancy who think not of reducing it ad praxim or drawing conclusions out of it but rest in the naked speculation of it as they doe of many others or lastly to some good practicall conclusions which they meet with in the word of God and apply to their lives as they doe not the former deductions such as these are for example Be ye holy as I an holy Without holinesse no man shall see God If ye consent and obey ye shall eat the good things of the land Godlinesse hath the promise of this life and of the life to come and such like And hence we may learne to measure this opinion not by some few of the men that hold it but by the sequels which the Logick even of simple men if they should apply their braines to ponder and consider it would fetch out of it No man that hath thoroughly suckt it in and understood the force of it but will either relinquish it or live according to the naturall importment of it that is licentiously 2. Secondly it is said that albeit this Doctrine doth teach that men are absolutely elected or absolutely rejected yet it tells no man who in particular is elected who rejected that must appeare by themselves and their lives and so it doth not stifle holy endeavours in any but rather encourage them in every man because it makes them to be signes whereby men must and may get the knowledge of their election Resp For answer to this in my judgement or the present the ignorance of a mans particular case doth not alter the case a jot For he that believes in generall that many and they the greatest company without comparison are inevitably ordained to destruction and a few others unto salvation is able out of these two generall propositions to make these particular conclusions and to reason thus with himselfe Either I am absolutely chosen to grace and glory or absolutely cast off from both If I be chosen I must of necessity believe and be saved If I be cast off I must as necessarily not believe and be damned Therefore what need I take thought either way about meanes or end My end is pitched in Heaven and the meanes too my finall perseverance in faith and my salvation or my continuance in unbeliefe and my damnation If I lye under this necessity of believing and being saved or of dying in unbeliefe and being damned in vaine doe I trouble my selfe about meanes or end I have my supersedeas I may take mine ease and so I will it is enough for me to sit downe and waite what God will doe unto me And in this manner it is to be feared doe too many reason in their hearts and by this very ground though they will not perhaps acknowledge it encourage themselves to prophanenesse Though men cannot hide their wickednesse yet they will hide their grounds which flesh them in it either through modesty or to avoyde some farther ignominy The foole hath said in his heart there is no God Psal 40. Suetonius de Vita Tiberii c. 69. p. 180. Saies of Tiberius that he was circa Deos religiones negligentior quippe addictus Mathematicae persuasionibus plenus omnia fato agi TWISSE Consideration I have already made answer to his objections after my maner it remaines I consider what he delivereth in debilitating those answers which he takes in to consideration 1. This answer was made by our Brittaine Divines in the Synod of Dort upon the first Article but so as that they proposed it not by it selfe alone but joyntly with shewing that neither the Nature of our Doctrine doth any way prove any hinderance unto pietie as formerly I have made mention therof Whereas he sayth that many of this our opinion are Godly men but that is no thankes to their opinion that they are so I answer that neither doe we give the glory of our Godlinesse to our good opinion nor have cause to thanke it therefore but we give God the Glory both of leading us into this truth amongst many others and for that Godlinesse that is in us also For we acknowledge that God is able to convict our consciences of that trueth hereof and yet refuse to lead us thereby into any Holinesse at all Yet let every sober man judge who are in a fairer way to true Holinesse or who are more likely to be in the state of true Holinesse they that oppose the grace of God in working our wills to faith and repentance or they that acknowledge it They who maintaine that God of the meere pleasure of his will regenerates us endueth us with the spirit of faith and repentance or they who maintaine that God doth not give faith and repentance to whom he will Neither is it the meaning of S t Paul where he sayeth God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth but rather where he findes an absolute disposition or worke in one which he finds not in an other Againe consider I pray indifferently who are more likely to be partakers of Gods grace they who truly magnifie it as the Author of their faith and repentance and of every good worke performed by them and that in a preventing manner or they that pretend to make Gods grace to be the Author of their faith and repentance and every good worke only by giving them power to believe if they will which we are able to prove both by the judgment of Austin and by cleare reason to be meere nature and not grace and accordingly exhorting them to believe and last of all concurring with them to the producing of the act of faith in them in case they will And seeing grace proves effectuall only by this subsequent manner of operation whether they doe not plainely mocke God in making him the Author of grace seing in respect of this effectuall operation they might as well make him the Author of every sinfull act as of every gratious act For it is agreed on all hands that God concurres as well to every sinfull act as any gratious act Whereas he sayth The true and naturall genius of our Tenet is to breed sloth and to drowne men in carnall security and to countenance carnall libertie I answer these words of his are but wind his reasons I have already considered and proved them to be of no weight For they depend partly upon a vaine supposition as if we maintained that God hath
day But to beat them out of the conceit of any sufficiency in them to profit either by Gods word or by his works so as to be drawn thereby to doe any thing that was pleasing in the sight of God and can there be any true holinesse where humility is wanting Againe they are only thankfull unto God for giving them power to believe to repent and for exciting them hereunto and concurring with them to the act of faith and repentance for they acknowledge no other grace but this We are bound by our doctrine to be thankfull not only for these operations but also for causing us to walke in his statutes to keepe his judgements and doe them for healing our wayes our back-slidings our Rebellions they by their Doctrine are bound to be thankfull unto God for no other grace in the way of grace prevenient then such as he vouchsafeth to reprobates and did vouchsafe to Cain to Judas and to the Divells themselves how is it that they are not stricken with feare least in this case their condition be no better then the condition of reprobates though God in good time may provide better things for them then their opinions have any congruity unto having course only to the obscuring and defacing of Gods grace We by our doctrine are bound to give God thanks for ruling us with a mighty hand and making us to passe under the rod and bringing us unto the bond of the Covenant for taking away our stony heart and giving us an heart of flesh for circumcising our hearts to love him with all our heart for raising us out of the dead when he found us dead in sinne for working in us both the will and the deed of every good worke not according to any thing in us but according to his good pleasure And this is so farre from breeding sloth in us or to drowne us in carnall security in the Apostles judgement as that upon this very ground as by a forceable inducement he exhorts us to worke out our Salvation with feare and trembling manifestly implying that when men are of another opinion as namely to thinke that the will and deed of any good thing is their owne worke or if they doe acknowledge it to be Gods work yet if they doe not acknowledge it to be wrought by God according to his good pleasure but according to some disposition whereby they dispose themselves thereunto that is the high-way to make them carnally secure and how but by a carnall confidence that they have power to turne to God when they list to believe and repent when they will and withall that their wills are as pliable to good as to evill and so make it an easy mater at any time to turne to God I appeale to the judgment of every sober conscience to judge betweene us which of our Doctrines most tends to the countenancing of carnall security according to the Tenor of the Apostles exhortation in this place and that in coherence with the reason whereby he doth enforce it theirs or ours But to proceed they acknowledge Christ to have merited for them only a power to believe and repent and meanes to excite them hereunto and concourse divine to the act of believing and repenting in case they will we acknowledge not only all this but over and above that Christ hath merited for us the working of our wills effectually and predominantly hereunto and that God makes us perfect to every good worke working in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ Nay what will you say if the Remonstrants now a dayes openly professe that Christ merited not for any man faith and regeneration and I commend them for their ingenuity in dealing fairly and plainly confessing that which their opinion doth manifestly drive unto Lastly we confesse that God hath power as to shew mercy on whom he will and harden whom he will so to make whom he will a vessell of mercy and whom he will a vessell of wrath this we clearely professe namely that God hath such power even over our selves and our childeren and all those that are neere and deare unto us as over any others But this these adversaries of ours now a days utterly deny now I pray consider whose doctrine savoreth of greater holinesse in acknowledging the soveraignty of God over his creatures theirs or ours But it will not be labour lost altogether to consider those causes whereunto he is pleased to impute that Godlinesse which is found in us The first is Gods providence and indeed I find them liberall enough in acknowledging Gods providence in generall termes and as forward to blast it when they come to particulars Now as for that providence which is the cause of Godlinesse we like plaine fellowes comonly call it grace and the ground of this Authors subtility in calling it providence and not grace I comprehend not But what is that operation of providence divine or grace which is the cause of Godlinesse Is it any other in his opinion then that universall grace whereby they have power to be Godly and which grace God affords unto Reprobates and that exciting grace whereby God perswades them to be Godly and his readinesse to concurre to any act of Godlinesse in case we will and is not all this afforded in his opinion to Reprobates as well as to the elect to them that have no Godlinesse at all in them as to them that have And why may not this doctrine of ours whereby we maintaine that God workes in us both the will and the deed according to his goodpleasure be a meanes to make us set our selves to the working out of our Salvation with feare and trembling considering that the Apostle professeth this doctrine of Gods energeticall operation of every good thing in us as a strong inducement to worke out our Salvation with feare and trembling and wherein consists any mans Godlinesse if not in this to wit in working out his Salvation with feare and trembling And is it not apparent that we maintaine this doctrine namely that God is he who workes in us both the will and the deed and every good thing and that according to his good pleasure in farre more undoubted manner then they doe And how can it appeare that they doe acknowledge this To give us power to will that which i good which is the effect of that universall grace they talke of is this to worke in us either the will or the deed To excite us by perswasion and exhortation to will doe that which is good to believe and to repent is to worke either in us the will or deed of that which is good of faith of repentance Lastly to be ready to concurre with us to the will or deed of faith and repentance if so be we will concurre with him to the same or to concurre with us to the producing of the act of willing the act of doing that which is good in
like as none were more opposite to the Epicures then they so none were more religious and devout among the Heathens then they Yet there is no opinion so true or good but by a prophane heart may be abused But as for the efficacy of Gods will we are so farre from maintaining that it takes away either the liberty of mans will or the contingency of second causes that we professe with Aquinas that the root of all contingency is the efficacious will of God and with the Authors of the Articles of the Church of Ireland Artic. 11. That God did from all eternity ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe and yet neither the liberty nor the contingency of second causes is thereby destroyed but established rather DISCOURSE The Fift and last sort of Reasons It is an Enimy to True Comfort SECT I. I Am come to my last reason against it drawn from the Vncomfortablenesse of it It is a doctrine full of desperation both to them that stand and to them that are fallen to men out of temptation and in it It 1. Leads men into temptation 2. Leaves men in it And therefore it is no part of Gods word for that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good newes to men a store-house of sweet consolations for them that stand and such as are fallen These things are written saith the Apostle Rom. 15. 4. That by patience and consolation of the Scriptures we might have hope implying that therefore was the word written and left to the Church that by the comforts contained in it those poore soules that look towards heaven might never want in any changes or chances of this mortall life a sweet gale of hope to refresh them and carry on their ship full merrily towards the Haven It leads men into temptation and into such a one too as is as sharpe and dangerous as any the tempter hath The Devill can easily perswade any man that makes absolute reprobation a part of his creed that he is one of those absolute Reprobates because there are more absolute Reprobates even an hundred for one then absolute chosen ones and a man hath a great deale more reason to think that he is one of the most then one of the least one of the huge multitude of inevitable castawaies then one of the little flock for whom God hath absolutely prepared a Kingdome Such a man is not only capable of but framed and fashioned by his opinion for this suggestion which is a very sore one if we may believe Calvin Bucer and Zanchius Calvin tells us Quod nulla tentatione vel gravius vel periculosius fideles percellit Satan that the Devill cannot assault a believer with a temptation more dangerous And a little after he saith It is so much the deadlier by how much commoner it is then any other Rarissimus est cujus non interdum animus hac cogitatione feriatur unde tibi salus nisi ex Dei electione Electionis autem quae tibi revelatio Quae si apud quempiam semel invaluit aut diris tormentis miserum perpetuo exeruciat aut reddit penitus attonitum So ordinary is the temptation that he who is at all times free from it is a rare man we are to conceive that he speakes of those that believe absolute reprobation and so dangerous it is that if it get strength he which is under it is either miserably tormented or mightily astonished And a little after this he saith againe Ergo si naufragium timemus sollicité ab hoc scopulo cavendum in quem nunquam sine exitio impingitur He that will not wrack his soule must keep from this rock Bucer also hath a passage like to this Vt caput omnis noxiae tentationis saith he repellenda est quaestio sumusnè praedestinati Nam qui de hoc dubitat nec vocatumse nec justificatum esse credere poterit hoc est nequit esse Christianus This doubt whether we are predestinated or no Must be repelled as the head of every pernitious temptation for he that doubts of this cannot be a Christian Praesumendum igitur ut principium fidei nos omnes esse a Deo praescitos Every man therefore must presume it as a principle of faith that he is elected This very speech of Bucers Zanchy makes use of to the same purpose We see then by the restimony of these worthy men that this temptation is very dangerous and ordinary too to such as think there are absolute reprobates The truth of both will farther appeare by the example of Petrus Hosuanus a Schoolemaster in Hungary who intending to hang himselfe signified in a letter which he left in his study for the satisfaction of his friends and Countrymen the cause of it in that writing he delivered these three things 1. That he was of Calvins and S. Austins opinion that men are not dealt withall secundum bona or mala opera according to their works good or evill but that there are occultiores causae more hidden causes of mens eternall condition 2. That he was one of that woefull company of absolute castawaies Vas formatum in ignominiam a vessell prepared to dishonour and that therefore though his life had been none of the worst he could not possibly be saved 3. That being unable to beare the dreadfull apprehensions of wrath with which he was affrighted he hanged himselfe For these are some of his last words there recorded Discedo igitur ad Lacus Infernales aeternum dedecus patriae meae Deo vos commendo cujus misericordia mihi negata est I goe to those infernall lakes a perpetuall reproach to my Country commending you to God whose mercy is denyed mee Out of this example we may easily collect two things 1. That men who think that there are many whom God hath utterly rejected out of his only will and pleasure may be easily brought to think by Satans suggestion that they are of that company And 2. That this temptation is very dangerous I conclude therefore the first part of my last Reason that absolute Reprobation leads men into temptation TWISSE Consideration AS I remember when this Author first had resort unto some prime stickler for the Arminian way to conferre with him there about it was told me that this Authour should alledge that our doctrine of election was a comfortable doctrine but then on the other side it was alledged that granting that yet with all it did expose to dessolutenes of life And therefore I little expect any such argument as this to be proposed least of all to be ranged amonst the nūber of those that are taken to be of a convincing nature Yet is it the lesse strange because the Apostle telleth us of some that their course is proficere in pejus to growe worse and worse But let us consider whether he speeds any better in this then in the former And whereas he saith It is a doctrine full of desperation both to them that stand
conditionall it must needs be predestination unto grace subsequent As for example God doth decree to worke in man the act of willing that which is good this decree say they is not absolute but conditionall Now I pray consider what is or can be the condition hereof but the act of willing And this indeed is their doctrine as I have seen it under the hand of one of them namely that God doth work in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle modo velimus as much as to say If we will make our selves willing to believe to repent to doe any good work then God will make us willing hereunto This is the issue of the comfortable doctrine of these Arminians and unlesse we concurre with them in such unsober expressions we expose our selves to the temptations of Satan yea the forest temptations if we believe this Author and bereave our soules of all comfort from the Scriptures As if divine consolations were like to their argumentations the one as unsober as the other But let us consider the force of his Argument If it be so easy a matter for the Divell to perswade a man of this how came it to passe that he did not perswade Austin hereof or Prosper or Fulgentius or any of those ancient writers in this argument against the Pelagians How is it that he could not performe so easy a matter upon Calvin Bucer Beza Zanchy Junius Piscator or any other of those famous writers in this argument How is it that he prevailes over so few in comparison Nay consider was there ever any that was perswaded or can this Author produce any evidence to prove that ever any was perswaded that himselfe was a Reprobate upon this ground to wit because the number of Reprobates are by farre fewer then the number of Gods elect though as he speakes an hundred for one I have read of diverse collected by Goulartius within that century of yeares next preceding his worke that have cast themselves away in despaire yet not all neither upon conceit of their absolute reprobation And of them that have so conceived not one doe I find that hath entertained this conceit upon the ground here mentioned by this Authour Francis Spira is a strange president but the ground of this desperate condition is manifested to have bin this that he cōceived himself to have sined the sin against the Holy Ghost Many in our dayes have been knowne to have made themselues a way and this very yeare 1632 hath brought forth many strange examples in this kind but hitherto I have not heard that the ground of this their desperate resolutions was this that the Devill had perswaded them they were absolute Reprobates much lesse that they were perswaded hereunto by so sorry a ground as that which this Authour alledgeth And as before I signified all this must proceed of reprobation from grace And if God deny grace upon the meere pleasure of his will and not according to mens workes the way is open to desperation and it is an easy matter for the Devill to perswade us that we are absolute Reprobates as this Authour with great zeale of his cause belike upon the singular comfort he finds in his owne way disputeth But over whom hath the Divell this power Not over Heathens for they are nothing acquainted with the doctrine of election and reprobation but over Christians Yet consider I pray who are Christians but such as believe in Christ And is it an easy matter for the Devill to perswade such as believe in Christ that they are Reprobates If so then either as it is reprobation from grace or as it signifies reprobation from glory not as it signifies reprobation from grace for it is supposed they are in the state of grace to wit in the state of faith which is the prime grace As for reprobation from glory we doe not maintaine that God doth absolutely deny that or that he decreed absolutely to deny that but only to such as should be found to dye in sinne Againe as many as maintaine absolute reprobation they doe withall maintain that faith is a fruit of election and consequently by the Genius of their doctrine must conclude that they are elect and not Reprobates Againe they according to their doctrine doe maintaine that who is once in the state of regeneration connot fall a way totally or finally Therefore they are not so easy to be perswaded that they are Reprobates at all but elect rather Let them that is our adversaries looke to this and that they are not easily perswaded by the Devill that they are reprobates at least that they neither have or can have any assurance of their election for as much as they deny faith to be a fruit of election and whatsoever their faith be yet are of opinion that they may totally and finally fall from it and be damned Farther consider seeing this Authour denies not but the damnation of every Reprobate is decreed by God everlastingly and that irrevocably though upon foresight of finall perseverance in sinne I pray what comfort is it for any man that he is not an absolute Reprobate if so be he is perswaded that he is a Reprobate and from everlasting ordained to condemnation Now I will prove that it is an easy matter for the Devill to perswade any Arminian that he is a Reprobate by the same argument which this Authour useth against us For seeing the Reprobates are more by farre then the elect even an hundered for one and withall that it is an easy thing for the Devill to perswade any man that he is rather of that number which is greatest then of that which is least hence it followes by his owne forme of argumentation that it is an easy matter for the Devill to perswade any Arminian that he is a Reprobate Yet the vanity of this argumentation I have formerly shewed by representing first the vast number of Heathens in all ages in comparison unto Christians Secondly the variety of Sects in Christian Religion and that most of them miserably corrupt together with the vast number of prophane persons on the on side and of Hypocrites on the other why should any man that is privy to his owne heart as looking towards Heaven be carried away with so base a pretence as to conceive himselfe to be a Reprobate especially considering the nature of man to hope the best of his fortunes and that upon no ground to speake of as it appeares in those who venture in Lotteries Whereas every true Christian believing in the Christ hath a certaine ground for the assurance of his election by our doctrine And truly I am verily perswaded the Devill is more wise then to think so base an illusion as this is likely to prevaile Save that in case this Author or his Informator doe believe as they pretend hereupon he may take advantage to work upon them according to their own rules to perswade them thereby that they are Reprobates and 'till we find
manner to command Abraham to sacrifice his sonne but it was not Gods determination that Isaack should be sacrificed In like sort he commanded Pharaoh to let Israel goe but withall he told Moses he would harden Pharaohs heart that he should not let them goe for a long time 2. But in the accommodation of these distinctions unto thy selfe What ground hast thou to affirme that God willeth not thy salvation in particular If thou believest Gods word assureth thee thou shalt be saved if thou believest not yet thou maist believe and Gods word hath power to bring thee unto faith as formerly I have discoursed And as for the best of Gods Children who doe believe to the great comfort of their soules rejoycing with joy unspeakable and glorious 1 Pet. 1. They were sometimes in as uncomfortable a condition as thou now art And the rather I put thee upon this because I see he that takes upon him to comfort thee doth take a course rather to feed thy humour then to remove it in as much as he never enquires into the cause thereof For albeit he gave to understand he would apply his argument with as much art and cunning as could be yet it may be that was rather with respect to the advantage of his own cause then to thy consolation But let us see whether he mends it in the next Minister Christ came into the World to seeke and to save what was lost and is a propitiation not for our sinnes only i. e. the sinnes of a few particular men or the sinnes of all sorts of men but for the sinnes of the whole World therefore he came to save thee for thou wast lost and to be a propitiation for thy sinnes for thou art part of the whole World CONSIDERATION Still he continues to afford thee as much comfort as any Reprobate in the world and if thou desirest no more thou maist rest satisfied with this but withall I confesse he affords thee as much comfort as he can afford any of Gods elect for he maketh elect and Reprobate all alike in receiving comfort from Gods Word Christ came into the world to save that which was lost but unlesse he came to save all that is lost it will not follow that he came to save thee We know that pardon of sinne and salvation is procured by Christ for none but such as believe and therefore be not deceived without faith looke for neither by faith be assured of both and that thou art one of Gods elect and no Reprobate And observe well he tells thee nothing of Christ meriting faith and repentance this now a dayes is plainly denyed by the Remonstrants and this Authour is content to say nothing of it when he is put to it we know what must be the issue of it if he sayeth Christ hath merited faith and repentance for thee the meaning is but this Christ hath merited that if thou wilt believe thou shalt believe if thou wilt repent thou shalt repent And that Christ hath merited that God should bestow faith and repentance not on whom he will according to the meere pleasure of his will but according to mens workes The comfort that our doctrine ministers unto thee is this If thou dost believe in Christ thou maist be assured thou art an elect of God if thou dost not believe there is no cause why thou shouldest thinke thy selfe a Cast-away for albeit thou hast not faith to day yet thou maist have faith to morrow Give thy selfe to Gods Word and waite upon him in his ordinances thou maist be so wrought upon as that unbeliever was 1 Cor 14. Who is there represented falling downe on his face and confessing that God was in the Preacher of a truth And though at first thou attendest to it but in a carnall manner yet God may open thy heart as he opened the heart of Lidia and make thee attend unto it in a gracious manner Tempted The World as I have heard is taken two waies in Scripture Largely for all mankind and strictly for the elect or believers In this latter sense Christ dyed for the World Or if for all yet it was only dignitate pretii not voluntate propositi thus only for a few selected ones with whom it is not my lot to be numbred CONSIDERATION Suffer not thy selfe to be abused by them who pretending thy comfort yet seeke nothing lesse but only the promoting of their owne cause And observe how he takes notice of no other benefits of Christs death then such as belong unto men upon the condition of faith to wit pardon of sinne and Salvation in which case the mention of Gods elect comes in very unseasonably And thus is the love of God set forth unto us so God loved the world that he gave his only begotten Sonne that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life And if it be not thy lot to be numbred amongst believers then we can give thee by Gods Word no assurance of thy Salvation But if thou art not a believer yet thou maist be in good time as formerly I have spoken more at large and therefore no reason to think thou art a Reprobate And if once thou dost believe in Christ our doctrine gives thee assurance of Justification Salvation and Election the Arminan doctrine doth not As for faith and repentance we say Christ hath merited them also but to be bestowed how According to mens workes say our Arminians though forraine Arminians professe plainly that Christ merited not faith and regeneration for any And if thou relishest this comfort be satisfied with it we say faith and repentance are bestowed absolutely according to the meere pleasure of Gods will and accordingly Christ merited them but not for all for then all should believe and repent and be saved but only for some and who can these be but Gods elect whence it followeth clearly that whosoever believes may by our doctrine be assured of his election not so by the doctrine of Arminians but if thou believest not thou art in no worse case then the best of Gods childern have been for there was a time when they believed not therefore thou hast no more cause to think thy selfe a cast-away then they had Minister God hath founded an universall Covenant with men upon the bloud of Christ and therefore he intended it should be shed for all men universally he hath made a promise of salvation to every one that will believe and excludes none that will not believe CONSIDERATION This I confesse is to administer as much comfort as is administred to any Reprobate but how can this qualify thy discomfort and discontent which riseth from this conceit that thou art a Reprobate And the truth is that by our Doctrine wee were all in a miserable case if Gods Covenant of grace extended no farther then this But hath not God promised to be our Lord and our God that sanctifyeth us to circumcise our hearts and the hearts
which he will and proper in the thing whereto he sends it And remove all vaine grounds of apprehensions of terrible things against themselves What if a great many be reprobated from grace and shall never have any part in Christ it doth not follow that this afflicted soule is any of them what one is there of the children of God which was not sometimes dead in sinne and if pangs of childbirth goe before the delivering of a child into the world of nature why should it seeme strange that pangs of childbirth are suffered before a man be brought forth in to the world of grace And these feares and terrours wherwith this poore soule is perplexed may be unto her as pangs of childbirth to bring her forth into a new world We say that by Gods Word we are to conceive that ye are elected upon our faith and repentance Thus Paul concluded the election of the Thessalonians 1 Thess 1. 3 4. And 2 Thess 2. 13. Thus Melancthon would have us seeke it but by the Arminian doctrine it is in vaine to seeke after it for as much as none can find it We acknowledge that as our Saviour saith Few are chosen therefore we admonish every one to strive to enter in at the straight gate This was our Saviours exhortation delivered by way of answer to a question made unto him by his Apostles Whether there were but few that should be saved We teach that Christ hath died for the people of God for the elect of God for his Church for his body not only to make satisfaction for sinne and to procure salvation for them in case they believe but to procure also the Holy Spirit for them to make them believe and repent c. And this is wrought by the word which is the sword of the spirit We take not the course he obtrudes upon us We make no such distinctions for the consolation of the afflicted as he faignes We deale plainly and spare not to professe that albeit salvation is open to all that believe and that by the ordinance of God yet that no man is able of himselfe to believe or repent for as much as the Scripture testifies that all are dead in sinne in the state of nature and led captive by the Divell to doe his will and that the very Law of God doth strengthen sinne such being the course of mans corruption that the more he is forbidden this or that the more it provokes him to transgresse taking occasion by the law to work in mans heart all manner of concupiscence this is our course to beat downe the pride of man and beat out of him all conceit of ability to doe any good as of himselfe and so to cast him downe at the feet of Gods mercy Yet God is able by his grace to quicken him and being brought up in the Church of God wherein is the balme of Gilead able to heale our waies be they never so sinfull and that that is administred not according to the vile workes of men as if they had any power to prepare them for the participation of Gods grace but of the meere favour and good pleasure of God Who calleth as the Apostle speakes 2 Tim. 1. 9. with an holy calling not according to our own workes but according to his own purpose and grace And that for the merits of Christ who hath merited not only pardon of sinne and salvation for all that believe but faith also and regeneration for all his elect and being as we are members of Gods Church we have no cause to despaire but sooner or later God may call us as continually he doth some or other and we know not how soone our turne may come And as for Gods purpose touching the performance of the condition of faith we plainly professe That God purposed to give faith and repentance only to his elect according to that Act. 13. 48. As many believed as were ordained to everlasting life And Acts 2. last God added daily to his Church such as should be saved Now heare I pray their doctrine on the other side which set out our manner of consolation devised most ridiculously at their own pleasure so to expose our doctrine to scorne Doth God purpose to bestow faith and repentance upon any other besides his elect This they must avouch if they contradict us and that he purposeth to bestow it on all and every one but how Not absolutely on any that is not according to the meere pleasure of his will how then Surely conditionally to wit according to mens workes that so not Semi-Pelagianisme only but plain Pelagianisme may be commended unto Gods Church for true Christianisme And what is that worke in man whereupon God workes faith or repentance in them Surely the will to believe the will to repent So that if all men will believe will repent then in good time through Gods grace they shall believe they shall repent and if this be not to crowne Gods grace with a crowne of scornes as Christ himselfe was crowned with a Crowne of Thornes I willingly professe I know not what it is We utterly deny that God hath two wills one contrary to the other We acknowledge that in Scripture phrase Gods commandement is called his will as This is the will of God even your sanctification 1 Thess 4. 3. But this is not that will of God which the Apostle speakes of when he saith Who hath resisted his will Rom. 9. 19 For his will of commandement is resisted too oft But the will he speaketh off there is the will of Gods purpose and decree whereof the Psalmist speakes saying Whatsoever the Lord will that hath he done both in Heaven and earth Now suppose God command Abraham to sacrifice his sonne Isaack and yet decrees that Isaack shall not be sacrificed both which are as true as the word of God is true yet there is no contradiction For as much as his commandement signifies only Gods will what shall be Abrahams duty to doe not what shall be done by Abraham On the other side Gods decree signifies what shall not be done by Abraham Now what contradiction I pray is there betweene these It is Gods will that it shall be Abrahams duty to sacrifice Isaack but it is not Gods will that Isaack shall be sacrificed by Abraham for as much as when Abraham comes to the poynt of sacrificing Isaack the Lord purposeth to hold his hand In like manner God commanded Pharaoh to let Israell goe It was his will then that it should be Pharaohs duty to let Israel goe but withall he toâ—d Moses that he would harden Pharaohs heart that he should not let Israel goe whereby it is man iâ— est that God decreed that Israel should not be dismissed by Pharaoh for a while and that as is signified in the Text to make way for his judgements to be brought upon the land of Egypt whereby God meant to glorify himselfe as in the sight of Pharaoh and of his
them to be a good man or to have the grace of faith repentance or any other truly planted in his heart Which being so I say that the Minister cannot by the eternall acts and fruits of faith and repentance which he seeth come from him make it evident to the tempted for the silencing of all replies that he is without doubt a true believer and a true repentant and consequently no reprobate For still the tempted may say You may be deceived in me for you can see not a whit more in me then hath been seen in many a Reprobate If this be all you can say to prove me to be none I am not satisfied I may be a Reprobate nay I am a Reprobate and you are but a miserable comforter a Physitian of no value This that I say Piseator doth ingeniously confesse where he saith that no comfort can possibly be instilled into the soules of Reprobates afflicted with this temptation Whence it followes that the greatest part of men must beare their burthen if they fall into this trouble as wel as they can the Gospell cannot afford them any sound comfort 2. That the elect in this case may be comforted but it must be this way viz. by their feeling of the burthen of sinne and their desire to be freed from it by Christ which proofs as I have said are but only probable not infallible arguments of a mans election and therefore unsufficient comforts And in the end of the same Thesis where he saith That a man should reason thus with himselfe Grace is offered to some with a mind of communicating it to them therefore it may be that I am in that number he implyes that the doctrine of absolute Reprobation which teacheth this communication of grace to some few only affords but a fieri potest a peradventure I am elected for a poore soule to comfort himselfe withall TWISSE Consideration IN the last place we are to consider how truly he affirmeth that our doctrine leaveth a Minister none but weake grounds and those insufficient to quiet the tempted And whereas he saith We cannot conceive and make it evident to the understanding of the tempted that he is not that which he feares a Reprobate we willingly acknowledge it For not to be a reprobate is to be an elect Now how can any Arminian convince and make it evident to the understanding I doe not say of the tempted but of one that is a believer and walkes on comfortablely in the wayes of Godlinesse is he I say able to convince such a one and make it evident unto him that he is one of Gods elect I doe not think they dare professe that they presume they can or make it evident to their owne understanding that themselves are of the number of Gods elect How unreasonable then is this course to require of us to convince a man that acknowledgeth neither faith nor repentance in him for this is the condition of a man tempted as himselfe fashioneth it and to make it evident to his understanding that he is an elect and no reprobate when himselfe cannot convict him that believeth of this no nor their owne consciences neither notwithstanding all their confidence that they alone are in the right way of salvation Was there ever heard a more unreasonable course then this Againe to feare to be a reprobate or least he be a Reprobate is one thing to perswade himselfe that he is a Reprobate and to despaire thereupon is another thing We say and that according to our Doctrine that there is no cause why any man who hath not sinned the sinne unto death the sinne against the Holy Ghost should perswade himselfe that he is a Reprobate and despaire thereupon we doe not say there is no cause of feare In as much as he hath no evidence of his election there is just cause to feare but then againe seeing he neither hath nor can have any evidence of his reprobation excepting the guilt of the sinne against the Holy Ghost he hath every way as good cause to hope And for the comforting of such a one I would make bold to tell him that there is more hope of such a one as himselfe then of those who goe on in the wayes of their owne heart and in the light of their owne eyes without all remorse and check of conscience without feare or wit not considering that for all these things God will bring them to judgment And towards such I would think it fit to use all meanes and motives to make them feare The Apostle seemes to me to take the like course with better men then such even with such as went on in a faire and comfortable profession of Gospell namely to make them feare and suspect themselves as when he saith Prove youre selves whether you are in the faith examine your selves Know ye not that Christ is in you except ye be Reprobates 2 Cor. 13. 5. And for good reason for as Paul was jealous over the Corinthians with a Godly jealousy for feare least as the Serpent beguilde Eve through his subtilty so their minds should be corrupt from that simplicity which is in Christ 2 Cor. 11. 2 3. And in like manner entertained feare least when he came he should not find them such as he would and that he should be found unto them such as they would not c. 2 Cor. 12. In like manner I should think it is good for a man to be jealous over himselfe with a godly jealousy least their minds should be corrupt their wayes corrupt more then they are a ware of and there upon give themselves to the examining of themselves and to the searching and trying of their wayes whereunto the Holy Ghost exhorts us Lament 3. 40. And there is good comfort to be taken in such a jealousy such a feare such a course For we find that the spirit of bondage making us to feare is the forerunner of the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father Rom. 8. 15. Certainely they are in better case and nearer to the Kingdome of God then such as feare not yet is their no cause of despaire for as much as the elect of God had no evidence of their election before their calling Nay after their calling they may be much afflicted with the feares and terrours of God thinking themselves to be in worse case then indeed they are David found cause to pray that God would restore him to the joy of his Salvation yet Bertius would not say that David was fallen from grace and that propter graves causas yet who hath written more eagarly to maintaine that Saints may fall away from grace then Bertius But this Author beares before him such a spirit of confidence as if he would have all men ordered by his rules When Manoahs Wife Judg. 13. 22 23. discourseth thus If the Lord would kill us he would not have received a burnt offering at our hands nor shewed us these things He
commiserant grace hath not as yet raised you But if there be any not yet called whom God hath predestinated to be elected by his grace or whom his grace hath predestinated to be elected ye shall receive the same grace whereby to will and be Elect. And as for those that doe obey if you are not predestinated to be Elect the strength of obedience shall be withdrawne that you may cease to obey Thus farre the objection Austin's answer followeth thus When these things are said they ought not to to deterre us from confessing God's grace to wit which is not given according unto workes and from confessing predestination according thereunto like as we are not terrified from confessing God's foreknowledge if a man should discourse thereof in this manner before the people whether now ye live well or not well such shall ye be hereafter as God foresees ye will be either good if he foresees ye will be good or evill if he foresees he will be evill for what if upon the hearing hereof some give themselves to sloth and from labour prone to lust goe after their concupisences shall we therefore conceive that to be false which was delivered concerning God's foreknowledge And so he proceeds to justifie the truth of this doctrine which was objected against him by way of Crimination I say to justifie it as touching the substance of it though as touching the manner of proposing it he confesseth that to be unreasonably harsh in some particulars and shewes how that may be proposed in a more decent manner still holding up the same truth Thus Austine was able to answere for himselfe whilest he was living Now let us consider how Prosper answers for him after he was dead And first let us consider the objection it selfe now it is this That they who are not predestinate unto life although they live piously and righteously it shall nothing profit them but they shall be reserved so long untill they perish Now this is painely a part of the objection made by the Massilienses and they were Galli whom Prosper answereth for the objection proposed to Austine was that strength of obedience should be taken from them But in the objection of the Galli whom Prosper answeres it is set dowe in a milder manner thus They shall be reserved untill they perish Now Austine himselfe accomodates his answer hereunto in particular De bono Perseverantiae cap. 22. 1 For shewing the unreasonable harshnessein this manner of proposing it I wonder saith he if any weak man in a Christian people can by any meanes heare with patience that which followes as namely when it is said unto them yee that doe obey if ye be predestinated to be rejected the strength of obedience shall be withdrawne from you that you may cease to obey For thus to speake what seemeth it to be other then to curse or to prophesie evill after a sort Then he proceeds to she whow the same truth may be delivered in a fairer manner still holding up the truth of the doctrine of predestination If saith he a man thinke good to speake something of such as doe not persevere and need be so to doe What failes of the truth of this sentence if it be delivered thus But if some doe obey that are not predestinated unto the kingdome and to glorie they are temporarie ones and shall not persevere in the same obedience unto the end Then he proceeds to shew how the same objection may be framed against God's praescience thus Et si qui obeditis si praesciti estis rejiciendi obedire cessabtis If any of you doe obey if with all ye are foreseen to be rejected ye shall cease to obey whereby ye may observe how Austine in framing the objection leaves out the Phrase of withdrawing the strength of obedience as containing a calumnious imputation and such as Austine had nothing to doe with in the course of his opinion concerning predestination Thus Austine hath plainely answered for himselfe and needs noe other to answer for him and his answer proceeds without all colour of prejudice to his owne doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of predestination By this let the Reajudge of the ingenuitie of this Authour who conceales all this from his Reader bearing him in hand that Austine speakes in Prosper making answere to his objection whereas indeed there is a vast difference between Prosper's answer for Austine and Austin's answer for himselfe But like enough Prosper was willing to condescend to the Galli * and to gratifie them with an answer that in his judgment might be more acceptable and satisfactorie unto them To the consideration whereof I now proceed and therein to consider Prosper not Austin's mind concerning predestination as which he hath sufficiently manifested in answer to the same objection as I have shewed Therefore saith Prosper They are not predestinated because they were foreseen to be such hereafter by their voluntarie praevarication what will follow herence That foresight of sinnes was the cause why they were not predestinated unto life I answere first by denying this consequence for it may as well follow that the Creatours love is the cause why sinnes are forgiven him for the Gospell saith of the woman Luk the 7. Therefore many sinnes are forgiven her because she loved much such illations are not alwaies causall but very often merely rationall Secondly let it be causall and that foresight of sinne is the cause of non predestination unto life and accordingly of predestination unto damnation yet here I have a double answer First it is the most generall opinion that reprobation as it signifies a purpose to damne and accordingly to exclude from heaven presupposeth the prescience of sinne M. Perkins expresly professeth as much and other Divines at the Synod of Dort yet this hinders not the absolutenesse of reprobation which appeares in the purpose of God to deny grace and that absolutely to some like as he bestowes it upon others I meane the grace of faith and regeneration otherwise grace should be given according to workes Now let any passage be produced out of Prosper or any other Orthodox writer among'st the Antients to shew that God in distributing these graces unto some and denying them unto others did not proceed absolutely but according unto workes and according to this doctrine it is well knowne that Austine shaped his doctrine concerning predestination as it hath been shewed at large in the answer to M. Hord in the first section secondly that there may be a cause of predestination and reprobation Aquinas doth not deny but how quoad res volitas as touching things willed or praedestinatione reprobatione praepartas by predestination and reprobation prepared and in this sense Aquinas himselfe confesseth that foresight of sinne is the cause of reprobation the nineth to the Romans see how he explicates himselfe his wordes are these Lect 3. praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis ex parte poenae quae
that they shall come to passe in such a manner as joyned with a possibility of not cōing to passe otherwise they should come to passe not contingently but necessarily But it is growne to be this Authours naturall genius miserably to overreach while he keeps himselfe to his own formes inshaping the opinion of his adversaries impatient to be beaten out of them and to have his veteres avias à pulmone repelli oldgrandmothers vain conceits to be pulled out of Lastly this Authour shapeth us to make damnation an end intended by God which we conceive to be a very shallow project we know nothing but Gods owne glory that can be this end And therefore even there where Solomon professeth that God made the wicked against the day of Evill herewithall acknowledgeth that God made all thinges forhimselfe At length we have gotten cleare aboard to come acquainted with this Authours full discourse and not by patches as hitherto we have done For here he promiseth to acquaint us with the reasons that have convinced him of the untruth of absolute Reprobation as it is carried the upper way and like a Martialist a man at armes he tells us they fight against it and thus the interpolator discourseth The first part of the first Argument against the supralapsarians sect 1. They are drawen ab incommodo from the greater evils and inconveniences which issue from it naturally which may be referred to two maine heads 1 The dishonour of God 2 The overthrow of religion and government It dishououreth God For it chargeth him deeply with two things no wayes agreeable to his nature 1 Mens Eternall torments in Hell 2 Their sinnes on Earth First It chargeth him with Mens eternall torments in Hell and maketh him to be the prime principall 2nd invincible cause of the damnation of Millions of miserable soules The prime cause because it reporteth him to have appointed them to distruction of his owne voluntary disposition antecedent to all deserts in them and the Principall and invincible cause because it maketh the Damnation of Reprobates to be necessary and unavoydable thorough Gods absolute and uncontroulable decree and soe necessary that they can no more escape it then poore Astyanax could avoyd the breaking of his necke when the Graecians tumbled him downe from the Tower of Troy Now this is an neavy charge contrary to scripture Gods nature and sound Reason 1 To Scripture which makes man the Principall nay the only cause in opposition to God of his owne ruine Thy destruction is of thy selfe ô Israell but in me is thine help As I live saith the Lord I will not the death of the wicked c. Turne yee turne yee why will yee dye He doth not afflict willingly nor greive the Children of men To which speech for likeneile sake I will joyne one of Prospers Gods predestination is to many the cause of standing to none of falling 2 It is contrary to Gods nature who sets forth himselfe to be a God mercifull gracious long suffering abundant in goodnesse c. And he is acknowledged to be soe by King David Thou Lord art good and mercifull and of great Kindnesse to all them that call upon thee And by the Prophets Joell Jonah and Michah He is gracious and mercifull slow to anger and of great Kindnesse And who saith Micah is a God like unto thee that taketh away iniquity c. He retaineth not his wrath for ever because mercy pleaseth him 3 'T is contrary also to sound reason which cannot but argue such a Decree of extreame cruelty and consequently remove it from the father of mercyes We cannot in reason thinke that any man in the world can so farre put off humanity and nature as to resolve with himselfe to marry and beget Children that after they be borne and have lived a while with him he may hang them up by the tongues teare thir flesh with scourges pull it from their bones with burning pincers or put them to any cruell tortures that by thus torturing them he may shew what his Authority and power is over them Much lesse can we believe without great violence to reason that the God of mercy can so farre forget himselfe as out of his absolute pleasure to ordaine such infinite multitudes of his Children made after his owne image to everlasting fire and create them one after another that after the end of a short life here he might torment them without end hereafter to shew his power and soveraingty over them If to destroy the righteous with the wicked temporally be such a peece of injustice that Abraham removeth it from God with an Absit wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked that be farre from thee O Lord. shall not the judge of all the world doe right How deepely may we thinke would that good man have detested one single thought that God resolveth upon the destruction of many innocent soules eternally in hell fire Here this Authour carrieth himselfe like another Ptolomeus Ceraunus or as if he had some cheife place in the lightning legion not by his prayers but by his discourse he seemes to thunder and to lighten all along When the Lord appeared to Elias he was neither in the mighty wind nor in the earthquake nor in the fire but in the still and soft voyce I hope to prove all this to be but Ignis fatuus Mountebancks use to make great ostentation and crackes but commonly they end in meere impostures and it is no hing strange when men opposing the grace of God loose their owne witts and please themselves in the confusion of their owne senses For when men are in love with their owne errours they hate the light yea the very light of nature in the distinct notice of it would be an offence unto them Can this Authour be ignorant of that which every meane Sophister knowes that there be foure kinds of causes Materiall Formall Efficient Finall that he should expatiate thus in speaking of a cause without all distinction Is it strange that God should be a prime cause and principall in execution of vengeance Doth he not professe saying vengeance is mine and I will repay Is he not called the God to whom vengeance belongeth And are not his magistrates his Ministers to execute vengeance temporall here in this world And can any sober man dout whether God be invincible whom the Apostle pronounceth to be irresistable Againe an efficient cause admits farther distinction for it is either Physicall or Morall Physicall is that which really workes or executes any thing as every tradesman hath his worke which his hands doe make so God hath his worke which he executes and his worke is judgment as well as mercy I am the Lord which shew mercy and judgment and righteousnesse for in these things I delight saith the Lord and he would have us when we doe glory glory in this that we doe understand and know him to
be such a God A Morall efficient is twofold being only of a moveing nature to move others to doe somewhat as namely either by perswading or by meriting or deserving He that perswades moves an other to doe some what he that meriteth thereby moves another either to reward him or punish him Now to walke in the light of this distinction and not to please our selves by walking in darknesse though God be the prime principall and invincible cause of man's damnation in the kind of a cause efficient physicall which should not seeme strange to an ordinary Christian who knowes full well that vengeance is God's peculiar worke as the Iudge of all the world and that he delights in the execution thereof yet this hinders not but that man may be the cause of his own damnation in the way of a meritorious cause justly deserving it Omnis poena Deum habet Authorem All punishment hath God for the Authour of it This is a principle acknowledged both by the Arminians and Vasquez the Jesuite but never is punishment inflicted on any by the hands of God save on those who formerly have deserved it Consider we farther as touching the severall kinds of causes formerly mentioned if the question be which is the principall Aristotle answereth that this is not confined to any one kind of them somtimes the materiall cause somtimes the formall cause somtimes the efficient somtimes the finall cause is the demonstrative cause the cause propter quam the cause by vertue where of the effect hath its existence but this peculiar and speciall cause is described thus It is that whereby satisfactory answer is made to the question demanding why such a thing is Now in execution of punishment or condigne vengeance this satisfactory answer is made by representing the meritorious cause never by representing the efficient cause as for example if it be demanded why such a malefactor is executed upon the gallowes no sober man will answer because the Sheriffe cōmanded it to be so or because the Judge would have it so but because he robd upon the high way or committed some criminall fact or other which is capitall by the lawes of our land and to be punished with hanging upon the gallowes In like sort if question be made why devills or wicked men are damned is it our doctrine to referre the cause hereof to the mere pleasure of God Doe not all confesse that God inflicts damnation upon thē merely for their sinnes and transgressions wherein they have continued unto death without repentance Yet we acknowledge that God could have taken them off from their sinnes while they lived if he would by giving them repentance as he hath dealt with us and that merely of his free grace For we willingly confes that our sinnes are our owne but our faith is not our repentance is not When I say our owne I meane in respect that they are of our selves otherwise we acknowledge both faith and repentance to be our owne accipiendo in asmuch as we receive them but they are God's gifts and so they are his dando in asmuch as he gives them as Remigius speaketh Now what is become of this Authours pompous discourse Is it not the like the cracking of thornes in the fire making a great noise but the light of distinction like fire sets an end unto it and makes it appeare in its owne likenesse and proves nothing but a squib For albeit God in his decree makes the damnation of reprobates to be necessary and unavoidable yet seeing he makes it not to fall on any but for their sinnes what colour of dishonour unto God in ordaining that Iudas shall necessarily and unavoidably be damned for betraying the Sonne of God and afterwards most desperatly murthering himselfe If hereupon he could no more avoid his damnation then Astionax could the breaking of his neck when the Grecians tumbled him downe from the tower of Troy will any man that is not bereaved of common sense make strange of this It is true God did appoint both Iudas and all other wicked persons that never break off their sinnes by repentance unto destructiō of his own voluntary disposition For God workes all things according to the counsaile of his will and if it pleased him he could annihilate them upon the fresh foot of any sin or after they have suffered the vengeance of hell fire as many yeares in hell as they lived here in sinne yea and the devills in hell as Origen was of opinion and the Jewes at this day are of the same by Sir Edwin Sandes his relation whether this Author be of the same or not I know not And lastly we willingly confesse that the decree of God was antecedent to the deserts of men for reprobation is as antient as election and election was made before the foundation of the world if we believe Saint Paul rather then any other who either by word or deed doth manifest himselfe to be of a contrary opinion Still damnation is inflicted by God only for sinne and in degree answerable unto their sinnes and only because of their sinnes as a meritorious cause thereof though God makes use of it to his owne ends and the manifestation of his owne glory as Solomon professeth namely that God made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill And Saint Paul tells that as the Lord suffereth with long patience the vessells of wrath prepared to destruction that he might shew his wrath and make his power known So likewise another reason hereof he specifies to be this That he might declare the riches of his glory upon the vessells of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory For when we shall behold the unspeakable misery brought upon others by reason of their sinnes how rich will God's glory appeare unto us when we consider that had it not been for his free grace delivering us from sinne we had been swallowed up of the same sorrowes And thus Alvarez writeth disput III. The glory of God's mercy in his elect and in like manner the manifestation of divine justice on Reprobates is truely and properly the finall cause why God did permit sinnes both in Reprobates and Angells And he proves it out of this passage of Saint Paul So Aquin 1 p. pag. 23. art 5. This is the reason saith he why God hath chosen some and Reprobated others that representation might be made of Gods goodnesse towards the Elect in the way of mercy pardoning them and on the Reprobates in the way of justice punishing them And Alphonsus Mendoza a Scotist concurres with them in this and we see they make Saint Pauls doctrine their foundation And indeed albeit at the day of judgment there will be found a vast difference between the Elect and Reprobates the one having departed this life in the state of faith repentance the other in infidelitie and impenitency in such sort as God will bestow on his elect
foresee their wicked courses and what will become of them for it namely to be condemned to everlasting fire with the Divell and his Angells what shall we therefore conclude that God did not foresee the wicked waies and ungodly courses of all Reprobates that they would continue in them and die in their sinnes without all faith in Christ and true repentance towards God And if he did foresee what would be the ends of them in case he did create them and bring them forth into the world yet seeing he would neverthelesse create them and bring them forth into the world one after another in their severall times and ages shall we brand the holy name of God and reproach him for unnaturallnesse and barbarous crueltie Rather I will say what meanes this Auhour so unconscionably to corrupt the state of the question by mentioning only the shortnesse of their life and utterly concealing the wickednesse of their life the only meritorious cause of their torments which they suffer and accordingly to shape the ends intended by God to be only the demonstration of his power and Soveraingtie over them without all mention of his justice whereas we say that in the inflicting of damnation the cheife glory which God manifests is only the glory of his justice proceeding herein according to a law which himselfe hath made as most fit it is the Creatour should give lawes to his creature and the law is this whosoever believeth and repenteth shall be saved whosoever dyeth in sinne without repentance shall be damned Not one of our Divines that I know maintaines that inflicting damnation the Lord proceedes merely according to the good pleasure of his will in the communicating of faith and repentance we willingly confesse the Lord proceedes merely according to the good pleasure of his will and it is expresse Pelagianisme to affirme that grace is given according unto workes And herein this Authour is very well content to walke in the darke and conceale his most corrupt opinion most opposite to the grace of God But that damnation should be inflicted without respect to sinne as the meritorious cause thereof what one of our Divines can he produce that affirmeth Yet thus he is pleased to disguise our opinion when he findes the poverty of his strength to wage faire warre and so expose it to the hatred of me as if God ordained to damne men not for their sinnes but of his owne mere pleasure Thus of old the enemies of the Gospell dealt with Christians for first they would cloath them with beare skinnes and then set doggs upon them All that he hath to say to excuse his shamelesse crimination though so much he doth not expresse here is only this that our Divines maintaine the decree of damnation to preceed the foresight of sinne Yet this is untrue of the most part of them who premit both the foresight of sinne originall before reprobation from grace and of sinne actuall before the decree of damnation I willingly confesse for my part that I concurre with neither and if I should I should withall make the decree of permitting of sinne to preceed the decree of damnation for which I see no reason but yet I doe not make the decree of permitting sinne to follow the decree of damnation I hold these decrees to besimultaneous thus that God at once decrees both to create men and suffer them all to fall in Adam and to bring them forth in their severall generations into the world and to bestowe the grace of faith and repentance upon the one and so to save them and to deny the same grace unto others finally permitting them in their sinfull courses and so to damne them for sinne and all to manifest the glory of his mercy to the one and the glory of his justice on the other yea and his soveraingty too but wherein not in rewarding the one with Salvation and inflicting damnation on the other but only in giving grace to the one and not to the other And all the difference between our Divines is merely in apice Logico a point of Logick To wit as touching the right ordering of decrees concerning ends and meanes tending to the ends all concurring in this that God hath mercy on whom he will in bestowing faith and repentance upon them and whom he will he hardeneth in denying the same graces unto others Now when this Authour shall fairly prove that according to our opinion God destroyeth the righteous with the wicked then and not till then shall he prove that our faith differeth from the faith of Abraham What Divine of ours was ever knowne to affirme that God damneth any one that dyeth in repentance Yet it cannot be denied but that temporall judgments befall the righteous as well as the wicked When the Lord swept away 70 thousand with a three dayes pestilence in the land of Israel was it not possible thinks this Authour that any of God's deare children should perish by that pestilence To be caried away into captivity by an heathenish nation I should thinke is a greater calamity then to dye of the pestilence yet those who were carried away into Babylon with King Iechoniah the Lord represents by the basket of good figgs and those the Lord professeth that he had sent them away into Babylon for their good Were all damned will this Authour say that perished in the flood Saint Peter seemes to be of an other opinion where he saith To this purpose was the Gospell preached also to the end that they might be condemned also to men in the flesh but might live according to God in the spirit Truly I doe not say so much of them that perished in the conspiracy of Corah when the earth opened her mouth and swallowed up the conspirators nor them only but their wives and children also especially considering that inter pontem fontem mercy may be sought and mercy may be found Sect. 2. Containing the first Objection with the answer thereunto devised and my reply thereupon and an answer thereunto But God say some is soveraigne Lord of all creatures they are truly and properly his owne Cannot he therefore dispose of them as he pleaseth and doe with his own what he will The question is not what an almighty soveraigne power can doe to poore vassalls but what a power that is just and good may doe By the power of a Lord his absolute and naked power he can cast away the whole masse of mankind for it is not repugnant to Omnipotencie or soveraingty but by the power of a Judge to wit that actuall power of his which is alwaies cloathed with goodnesse and justice he cannot For it is not compatible with these properties in God to appoint men to hell of his mere will and pleasure no fault at all of theirs preexisting in his eternall mind It is not compatible with justice which is a constant will of rendring to every one his due and that is
words ye therefore heare them not because ye are not of God now what reasonable mā can deny but that it is a sin not to heare God's words then doth not our Saviour plainly professe that the true cause hereof is because they are not of God Now if to be of God in this place doth signifie God's Election then the cause of their sinnes hereby is made God 's not electing of them But if this phrase To be of God signifie God's regenerating of them as I thinke it doth then God's not regenerating of them is made the cause of this their disobedience in not hearing God's word 's and indeed the evill of sinne hath noe efficient cause but deficient only as Austine hath delivered long agoe And God is not bound to any either to elect him or regenerate him so that in failing to regenerate mā he doth not deficere or faile in any culpable mā ner now let every indifferent Reader judge whether here be not Dignus vindice nodus a knot worthy to be loosed it will require some worth of learning in him that solves it And is it decent for this Authour to censure a man for a conclusion made by him out of the word of God without shewing the faultinesse either of his interpretation thereof or of his consequence framed therehence So that this Author's wit cunning is more to be cōmended in not specifying the place where Piscator delivers this doctrine then either his learning or his honesty He was loath to raise spirits afterwards to prove unable to lay them Therefore thus I answer in behalfe of Piscator though God her by me made the cause why sōe heare not God's words to wit in as much as he doth not regenerate thē nor give the eies to see nor eares to heare an heart to perceive according to that of Moses Yet he doth not make God any culpable cause neither indeed is he any culpable cause while he failes to performe so gracious a worke towards thē the reason whereof is this He and he alone is a culpable cause who failes in doing that which he ought to do ut God all be it he doth not regenerate a man yet he failes not of doing that which he ought to doe For it is no duty of his to regenerate any man for he is bound to none Now to be the Authour of sinne is not only to be the cause thereof but to be a culpable cause thereof Undoubtedly God could preserve any man from sinne if it pleased him and if he doth not he is nothing faulty Secondly I answere that in true account God is only the cause why our naturall infidelity is not healed our corruption not cured Like as a Physitian may be said to be the cause why such a man continues sicke in as much as he could cure him but will not Soe God could cure the infidelitie of all but will not Only here is the difference the Physitian may be a culpable cause as who is bound to love his neighbour as himselfe but God being bound to none is no culpable cause of man's continuance in sinne and in the hardnesse of his heart albeit he can cure him but will not As for Piscator's saying here mentioned Reprobates are appointed precisely to this double evill to be punished everlastingly and to sinne and therefore to sinne that they may be justly punished Hereing are two things charged upon Piscator 1. That Reprobates are precisely appointed by God to perish everlastingly To this I answer that noe Arminiā that I know denies Reprobates to be appoinby God to everlasting damnation All the question is about the manner of appointing them namely whether this appointment of God proceeds meerly according to his meer pleasure or upon the foresight of sinne We say it proceeds meerly according to the good pleasure of God and not upon the foresight of sinne preceding And this we not only say but prove thus If reprobation proceed upon the foresight of sinne then it were of men's evill workes Now looke upon what grounds the Apostle proves that election is not of good workes upon the same ground it is evident that reprobation is not of evill works for the argumēt for the one is this Before Iacob Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therfore election is not of good works In like manner thus I reason concerning Reprobation Before Iacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therefore reprobation is not of evill workes 2. If God doth ordaine any man to damnation upon foresight of sin then this sin foreseen is the cause of the Divine ordinance but sin foreseen cannot be the cause why God ordained man to damnation as I prove thus If it be the cause then either by the necessity of nature or by the ordinance of God not by necessity of nature For undoubtedly God if it pleased him could ordaine to annihilate them for their sinnes instead of punishing them with eternall fire Nor can it be the cause of any such decree by the free ordinance of God For if it were marke what intolerable absurdityes would follow namely this That God did ordaine that upon the foresight of sinne he would ordaine men unto damnation whereby God's eternall ordination is made the object of God's ordination whereas all know that the Objects of God's decrees which are all one with his ordinations are things temporall not things eternall 3. If the foresight of sinne goes before the decree of damnation then the decree of permitting sinne goes before the decree of damning for sin that is the permission of sinne was first in intention and consequently it ought to be last in execution that is First man should be damned for sin and not till afterwards permitted to sinne The second thing charged upon Piscator is this that Reprobates are precisely appointed to sin Now here the crimination grates not upō the manner of being appointed thereunto otherwise a way could be opened for a progresse in infinitum Now why should it be any more a fault in Piscator to say of some that they are appointed to sinne then in Peter to say of some that they are appointed to disobedience or in all the Apostles to professe that all the outrages committed by Herod and Pilate by the Gentiles and people of Israell were such as Gods hand his counsell had before determined to be done or why doth Piscator make God to be the Authour of sinne in this more then Peter and all the Apostles And considering this man's unconscionable carriage in this let the Reader take heed how he suffers himselfe to be gull'd by this Authour and drawne to censure such speeches in Piscator as making God the Authour of sinne when hereby he is drawne ere he is aware to passe the like censure on the Apostles And the
then to advance our selves into the very Throne of God's Soveraigntie and doe wee not feare least his wrath smoake us thence And if all this that hee contends for were granted him that nothing but mere necessitie were found in the motion of men's wills yet Suarez will justifie us from speaking contradiction or delivering ought that exceeds the compasse of God's omnipotencie And what if all the world were innocent yet God should not be unjust in casting the most innocent creature into hell fire as Medina professeth and that by the unanimous consent of Divines and Vasquez the Jesuite acknowledgeth this to be in the power of God as he is Lord of life and death and in the last chapter of the booke de praedestinatione gratiâ which goes under Austin's name there is an expresse passage to justifie it And albeit that worke be not Austin's yet it is lately justified to be the worke of a great follower of Austin's and as Orthodoxe as he namely the worke of Fulgentius as Raynaudus the Jesuite hath lately proved and justified that passage also together with that which is usually brought by School-Divines to prove it out of the twelfth chapter of Wisedome and shewes the right reading as followed by Austin and Gregory And withall represents a pregnant passage taken out of the fifteenth Homily of Macarius to the same purpose And out of Chrysostome in his 2. De compunctione cordis about the end thereof And out of Austin upon Psalme the seventieth about the beginning And to these he addeth Ariminensis Cameracensis Serarius and Lorinus all maintaining the same And this is evident by consideration of the power which it pleased the Lord to execute upon his holy Son and our blessed Saviour and by the power which he gives us over brute creatures This I say if all that he contends for were granted should rather be concluded therehence namely that in this case the creature should be innocent then that God should be the Authour of sinne especially considering that God performes in all this noe other thing then belongs unto him of necessitie as without which his moving of the second causes it were impossible the creature should worke at all which we have made good by shewing the manifest absurdity of their contrary doctrine who maintaine a bare concourse Divine either in subordination unto the agency of the creature or without subordinating the operation of the creature to motion Divine But we doe subordinate it as without which the second cause could not worke at all and by vertue whereof it doth worke and that freely so farre forth as liberty of will is competent to a creature but not so as to make the creature compeere with his Creatour Let man be a second free Agent but set our God that made us evermore be the first free Agent least otherwise we shall deny him the same power over his creatures that the Potter hath over the clay of the same lumpe to make one vessell unto honour and another unto dishonour This power in my maker the Lord hath given me eyes to discerne as taught us in his holy word and an heart to submit unto it and to his providence in governing my will even in the worst actions that ever were committed by me without any repining humour against his hand though I thinke it lawfull for us in an holy manner to expostulate with God sometimes in the Prophets language and say Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy waies and hardened our hearts against thy feare Which yet I confesse he brings to passe at noe time infundendo malitiam by infusing any malice into me who naturally have more then enough of that leaven in me but non infundendo gratiam not quickning in me that holy feare which he hath planted in me of which grace I confesse willingly I have a great deale lesse then I desire though the least measure of it is a great deale more then I doe or can deserve Neither shall I ever learne of this Authour after his manner to blaspheme God if at any time hee shall harden my heart against his feare Though this Authour speakes commonly with a full and foule mouth yet his arguments are lanke and leane and of noe substance but words As when hee saith that God over-rules men's wills by our opinion Now to overrule◠a man is to carry him in despight of his teeth Wee say noe such thing but that God moves every creature to worke agreably to it's nature necessary things necessarily contingent things contingently free Agents freely though nothing comes to passe by the free agency of any creature but what God from all eternity by his unchangable counsell hath determined to come to passe As the eleventh Article of Ireland doth professe by the unanimous consent of the ArchBishop Bishops and Clergy of that Kingdome when those Articles were made So I speake warily and circumspectly the rather because one Doctour Heylin doth in a booke intituled The History of the Sabbath professe Chapter 8. page 259. That that whole booke of Articles is now called in and in the place thereof the Articles of the Church of Ireland confirmed by Parliament in that Kingdome Anno 1631. A thing I willingly confesse at first sight seemed incredible unto mee namely that Articles of Religion agreed upon in the dayes of King Iames should be revoked in the dayes of King Charles but expect to heare the truth of that relation For the Authour thereof hath never as yet deserved so much credit at my hands as to be believed in such a particular as this But to returne this Authours text is nothing answerable to the margent For first imperare to command is one thing and to over-rule is another thing though he that doth imperare command ought is commonly accounted the Authour thereof as a cause Morall from whom comes the beginning of such a worke But utterly deny that God commands evill and the truth is wee acknowledge noe other notion of evill then such as the Apostle expresseth in calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an incongruitie to the law of God which law commands somethings and forbids other things I come to his third reason 3. I grant wicked counsellours and perswaders are deservedly accounted the Authors of sinne The common use and acception of the words as I shewed in answer to the first is observed to denote such Therefore Cicero makes Authour and disswader opposite and by law they are punishable in the same degree with the Actors But God is noe counsellour or perswader to any lewd course but forbids it and disswades it and that with denuntiation of the greatest judgments among trangressours 2. I willingly confesse that councelling is farre inferiour to enforcing yet in Scripture phrase earnest intreaty or command is oftentimes exprest by compelling as Mat 14. 22. Mark 6. 45. Luk 14. 23. Gala 6. 12 and 2. 14. 1 Sam 28. 23. 2 Chron 21. 11. And noe marvaile
for hereby many times men are drawen full sore against their wills to doe that which they would not It is true God's power cannot be resisted but neither hath any man any will to resist that motion of God whereby he workes agreable to their natures then indeed there were place for resisting If the Lord carrieth on a covetous person such as Achan to covet a wedge of gold and a Babylonish garment and coveting it move him accordingly to take it and convey it away secretly and hide it in his tent what resistance doth he make in all this Or what is done in all this lesse agreably to his covetous disposition then to the disposition of Toades and Addars when he moves them according to their nature to sting and poyson So he moved the Babylonians compared to Serpents and Cockatrices to sting a wicked people Doe not the Scriptures plainly professe that God did send them Is not Assur in this respect called the Rod of God's wrath and the staffe in his hand Was it not called the Lords indignation Is he not compared to an axe and a sawe shall the axe boast it selfe against him that heweth therewith Or shall the saw extoll it selfe against him that moveth it Still he confounds the act with the sinfulnesse thereof speaking of God's producing sinnes whereas sinne is never produced it being only an obliquity consequent unto the act of such a worker as is subject to a law And our Adversaries confesse that God is the cause of the act as well as we Yet will they not hereby be driven to professe that in producing the act he produceth the sin As for that which he speaks of Inforcing we may well pitty him that when he wants strength of reason he supplies that by phrases We deny that God inforceth any man's will Nay it is the generall rule of Schooles that voluntas non potest cogi the will cannot be forced We maintaine that every act of the will especially in naturall things such as a sinfull act must needs be for only gracious acts are supernaturall is not only voluntary which is sufficient to preserve it from being forced but free also by as much libertie as the creature is capable of only we deny that the will of man is primum liberum a first free agent that is the prerogative of God alone the first mover of all and the supreme Agent thus I have dispatched my answer to his first reason consisting of three parts I come unto the second Sect 4. If we could find out a King that should so carry himselfe in procuring the ruine and the offences of any Subjects as by this opinion God doth in the affecting of the damnation and transgressions of Reprobates we would all charge him with the ruine and sinnes of those his Subjects Who would not abhorre saith Moulin a King speaking thus I will have this man hangâ—d and that I may hang him justly I will have him murder or steale This King saith he should not only make an innocent man miserable sed sceleratum but wicked too and should punish him for that offence cujus ipse causa esset of which himselfe was the cause It is a cleare case Tiberius as Suetonius reports having a purpose to put some Virgins to death because it was not lawfull among the Romans to strangle Virgins caused them all to be deflouered by the hang-man that so they might be strangled Who will not say that Tiberius was the principall Authour of the deflouring of those Maides In like manner say the Supralapsarians God hath a purpose of putting great store of men to the second death but because it is not lawfull for him by reason of his justice to put to death men innocent and without blame he hath decreed that the Devill shall defloure them that afterwards he may damne them It followeth therefore that God is the maine cause of those their sinnes If a King should carry himselfe as God did in hardning Pharaoh's heart that he should not let Israel goe and when he had let Israel goe to harden his heart that he should follow after them we would acknowledge such a one not to be man but God And then surely whatsoever our Arminians would thinke of such a one we would thinke noe otherwise then Solomon did of him of whom he professed that he made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill If God doth but permit a man to will this or that necesse est saith Arminius it must needs be ut nullo argumentorum genere persuadeatur ad nolendum that noe kind of argument shall perswade such one to abstaine from willing it And I hope Arminius hath as great auhority with this Authour as Mr. Moulin deserves to have with us Noe King hath power to dispense any such providence as this St. Paul tells us plainly that God hath ordained some unto wrath and as he hath made of the same lumpe some vessells unto honour so hath he made other vessells unto dishonour The Lord professeth that he kept Abimelech from sinning against him Thus the Lord could deale with all if it pleased him Why doth he not is it not for the manifestation of his own glory For to this purpose he hath made all things And that he suffers with long patience vessells of wrath prepared to destruction And what to doe doth he suffer them But to continue and persevere in their sinfull courses without repentance the Apostle plainly tells us that it is to declare his wrath and make his power known This is not the voice of any Doctor of ours now a dayes but of St. Paul And shall Mr. Moulin be brought in to affront St. Paul For recompence let the Jesuits be heard to whom the nation of the Arminians are beholden for their principall grounds Wherefore doth God give effectuall grace unto one and not unto another but because he hath elected the one and rejected the other And I appeale to every sober Christian whether the absolutenesse of reprobation doth not as invincibly follow herehence as the absolutenesse of Election But touching Mr. Moulin I have heard that Doctor Ames somtimes wished that he had never medled in this argument I am not of Doctor Ames his mind in this though it were I thinke most fit every one should exercise himselfe in those questions wherein by the course of his studies he hath been most conversant so should the Church of God enjoy plus dapis rixae multo minus invidiaeque I doe admire Mr. Moulin in his conference with Cayer as also upon the Eucharist and on Purgatory he hath my heart when I read his consolalations to his Breathren of the Church of France as also intreating of the love of God I would willingly learne French to understand him only and have along time desired still to get any thing that he hath written I highly esteem him in his Anatomie though I doe not
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
an inordinate act and distinguisheth the act from the inordination of it q 79. art 2. He proposeth the question whether the act of sin be from God and in the conclusion resolves it thus Cum actus peccati sit ens necessariò est à Deo Considering that the act of sinne is a thing having being necessarily it is of God And in the body of the Article Dicendum quod actus peccati est ens est actus ex utroque habet quod sit à Deo The resolution is that the act of sinne is both a thing that hath being and an act and in each condition it hath that it is of God And he proves this both by authority and by reason As for the defect of this act that non reducitur in Deum tanquam in causam sed in liberum arbitrium that is not charged upon God as the cause thereof but on a man's free will And he illustrates it thus Sicut defectus claudicationis reducitur in tibiam curvam sicut in causam non autem in virtutem motivam à quâ tamen causatur quicquid est motionis in claudicatione Like as the defect called halting is charged upon a crooked legge as the cause thereof and not upon the motive faculty though from it proceeds all the motion that is found in the halting Neither did I ever read any School Divine that contradicted this distinction Mr. Mason doth without alleadging any authority for it Yet he might have alleadged Arminius opposing after this manner though before him that I know not any 1. We say not only of many sins but of every sinne which hath any act therein that the Acts themselves are sinfull because every such sinne being actuall it is Actus cum defectu an act with a defect that is an act defective As Aquinas speakes in the place immediatly before alleadged and this defect is in respect of the law of God As Austin defineth sinne to be dictum factum concupitum contra legem Dei A thought word or deed against the law of God And this is enough I thinke to denominate it sinfull But the argument used by this Authour is the very same which was formerly used by Arminius and whereunto I have answered lib. 2. de permiss Sect 21 and that after this manner Be it so that the act it selfe is forbidden and consequently the act it selfe is inordinate but what will it therefore follow that these two are not to be distinguished to wit the act and the inordination of it a strange liberty of disputing A man's hand is sometimes inordinate as being monstrous either having too much or too little as either wanting five fingers or having more then five what therefore shall it not be lawfull for us to distinguish between the hand and the monstrosity of the hand 2. The wall it selfe is white what therefore shall we not distinguish between the wall and the white colour of it A man himselfe is vertuous and vicious shall this hinder us from due distinguishing between the man and his morall condition whether vertuous or vicious Many other arguments are represented by Arminius which this Authour toucheth not yet in the place forementioned I have shaken them all to peeces such is the rotten condition of them And over above I have proved not that in every sin the act is to be distinguished from the inordination of it but that in every sin of commission there is place for this distinction and that after this manner Every sinne of commission is an act inordinate but in every inordinate act we are to distinguish between the act it selfe and the inordination of it And that the act and the inordination of it are two I prove thus That if they are one and the same then we may well say that the act is an inordination but this is most false For nothing can be affirmed or predicated of the same thing both in the abstract and concrete God himselfe excepted As for example you may say of a wall that it is white you cannot say of it that it is whitenes For the wall is in the predicament of substance but whitenes being a colour is in the predicament of quality 2. Againe an inordination is a privation of order But no act is formally a privation and consequently neither can it be formally an inordination 3. An entitie positive a terme privative cannot be one and the same formally but two distinct notions Now every act is a positive thing but inordination is a mere privation 4. Lastly God is confessed by all to be the cause of the act but if the act be all one with the inordination he should be the cause not of the act only but of the inordination that is of the sinfullnes also 2. Observe his shifting carriage It is our Tenet that God is the Authour of the action it selfe but not of the obliquity and himselfe hath expresly acknowledged this to be our tenet in the beginning of this Section Now whereas he makes shew here of proving that we make God the Authour not of the action only but of the obliquity also he performes no such matter but only this that we make the object of God's decree not the action only but the aberration also but in all this there is no contradiction unto us We willingly grant that in as much as God permits sinne he will have sinne come to passe by his permission every good thing that comes to passe he will have it come to passe by his being the Authour of it and effecting it the evill that comes to passe he will have come to passe also not by his being the Authour of it and effecting it but only by his permitting of it So that still that of Austin holds good Non aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit Not any thing comes to passe unlesse God will have it come to passe And according to the eleaventh article of religion established in the Church of Ireland God from all eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever in time shall come to passe and according to the expresse word of God testifiing that the tenne Kings in giving their Kingdomes did herein doe the will of God And that the horrible outrages committed upon the person of the holy Son of God by Herod Pontius Pilate the Gentiles and people of Israel were by the hand and counsell of God before determined to be done We say sinfull courses not hand over head but unrepented of lead unto damnation but not as meanes For they are neither man's meanes for if they were then the end also whereunto they tend should be intended by him Neither are they any meanes of God For all meanes are the workes of him that intends the end So is not the sinne of man the worke of God but the permission of sinne is his worke And this is the meanes which he intends thereby to bring to passe his intended end which yet
That which necessitateth the will to sinne is as truly the cause of sinne as that which forceth it because it maketh the sinne to be inevitably committed which otherwise might be avoided and therefore if the Divine decree necessitate man's will to sinne it is as truly the cause of sinne as if it did inforce it 3. That which necessitates the will to sinne is more truly the cause of the sinne then the will is because it overruleth the will and beareth all the stroke taketh from it ' its true liberty by which it should be Lord of it selfe and disporser of ' its own acts and in respect of which it hath been usually called by Philosophers and Fathers too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a power which is under the insuperable check and controule of no Lord but it selfe It overruleth I say maketh it become but a servile instrument irresistably subject to superiour command and determination And therefore is a truer cause of all such acts and sins as proceed from the will so determined then the will is For when two Causes concurre to the producing of an effect the one a principle overruling cause the other but instrumentall and wholly at the Devotion of the principall then is the effect in all reason to be imputed to the principall which by the force of ' its influxe and impression produceth it rather then to the subordinate and instrumentall which is but a mere servant in the production of it We shall find it ordinary in Scripture to ascribe the effect to the principall Agent It is not ye that speak saith Christ but the Spirit of my Father that speaketh in you I laboured more abundantly then they all yet not I but the grace of God which was in me And I live yet not I but Christ liveth in me saith St. Paul Gal 2. 20. In these and many other places the effect or work spoken of is taken from the instrument and given to the principall agent Which being so though man's will worke with God's decree in the commission of sinne and willeth the sin which it doth yet seing what the will doth it doth by the commanding power of God's Allmighty decree and so it doth that otherwise it cannot doe the sin committed cannot so rightly be ascribed to man's will the inferiour as to God's necessitating decree the superiour cause 4. That which makes a man sinne by way of necessitie that is with and not against his will is the cause of sin in a worse manner then that which constraineth him to sinne against his will As he which by powerfull perswasions drawes a man to stab to hang to poison himselfe is in a grosser manner the cause of that evill and unnaturall action then he that by force compells him because he maketh him to consent to his own death And so if Gods decree doe not only make men sin but sin willingly too not only cause that they shall malè agere doe evill but malè velle will evill it hath the deeper hand in the sinne God determines the will to sinne by necessitie though not by compulsion this he obtrudes upon our Devines as their opinion but quotes none is it likely that he who quotes Beza to shew that in his opinion God doth not only permit sinne but will sinne And Calvin to shew that a man's mind is blinded volente jubente Deo would not quote some or other of our Divines to prove that which he obtrudes upon them If his common place booke could afford him any such quotation out of any one of them to shew who they be and where they say that God determines the will to sinne by necessity though not by compulsion Was there ever the like crimination made against any without naming them that say so and the place where and their own words Or hath this man or any of his spirit deserved any credit to be trusted this way The very phrase of determining in Latine is no word of course with our Divines in this argument It is the phrase of the Dominicans But doe they say that God determines the will to sinne I doe not thinke he can produce one of them that expresseth himselfe so unscholastically so absurdly Alvarez saith that God by his effectuall decree predetermineth second causes to worke He saith that God doth predetermine the will to the act of sinne as it is an act That the first root of contingency is the will of God Then to what doth God determine the will in their opinion Is it to the act only and not to the manner of its production Namely to produce it voluntarily and freely Nothing lesse though this Authour counts it his wisdome to conceale this God by his omnipotency doth cause that man whose heart he moves to will and will freely Againe God's generall concourse is a divine immediate influence into second causes whereby they are foremoved applyed and determined to worke every one according to the condition of its nature The naturall cause naturally the free cause freely as I have professedly delivered Disput 18. 23. And that in such sort freely as they can choose to doe otherwise if they will and that in the very instant wherin they doe what they doe But come we to consider his answer 1. Touching that which he saith of the Ancients he gives us his bare word for it as touching the confounding of necessitie and compulsion yet Bernard I confesse willingly in talking of liberty from necessity understands by necessity coaction He saith farther that those Ancients did deny that God did necessitate men to sinne least they should grant thereby that God is the Authour of sinne But I doe not thinke he can shew this phrase of necessitating the will any way to be found among the Ancients what he hath touched before I have considered what he shall intimate hereafter I hope I shall not let it passe unsaluted And the truth is to necessitate hath such an Emphasis with it as to perswade that whatsoever a man is necessitated to do that he doth by constraint against his will And it is a rule commonly received that Voluntas non potest cogi The will cannot be forced which is most true as touching Actus eliciti the acts of the will inward and immediate and not so of actus imperati acts outward and commanded But Bradwardine who alone useth this phrase among'st School-Divines takes it in no such sense but only for an effectuall operation of God upon the will moving it to worke this or that not necessarily but freely which this Authour most judiciously dissembleth all along for desparing to prevaile by true and substantiall information of the understanding perturbundis affectibus suffuratur by a corrupt proposition of his Adversaries tenet hopes to worke distast upon the Readers affections Bradwardines position is this God can after a sort necessitate every created will to ' its free act and to a free cessation vacation from act and
of the creatures future cooperation what the free will will doe in particular This conclusion is held of all those Divines who maintaine that God by his motion or effectuall grace not only morally but efficiently and physically doth cause us to worke that which is good it is proved saith he by all those reasons whereby it hath been formery shewed that God by his decree effectuall motion doth predetermine all second causes even such as are free to worke preserving their liberty and nature 3. The dominion of her act is not first in the power of free will created but in the power and dominion of God especially in respect of acts supernaturall Our meaning is that all dominion actuall use of dominion which the created will hath as causa proxima the next cause or doth exercise over her free acts which she produceth proceedeth from God as from the cheifest first cause efficient ought to be resolved into him as into the first Authour first absolute Lord thereof And the truth is the question of free will is commonly confounded though there is place of momentous distincion For as for free will unto good that is merely Morall and the resolution thereof is according to the resolution in the point of originall sinne But free will unto actions in generall under an appearance of good this is naturall liberty and the resolution thereof depends upon a right understanding of God's naturall providence in governing the world and working with all creatures in their severall kinds such operations as are agreable to their severall conditiōs The first liberty consists in disposing man aright towards his end like as morall vertues tend to this But the second liberty consist's only in the right use of the meanes unto what end soever is projected by us The appearance of good moving herein is only in genere boni conducentis in the kind of good conducing to the end propounded whether that end can be good or evill right or wrong But the appearence of good moving in the former is only summiboni of our cheifest good the enjoying whereof will make us happy But to returne this Authour with whom I deale in present stands for the will of man's absolute dominion over her acts as before he did expresse whereas Alvarez professeth utterly against this Neither doe I blame him for contradicting Alvarez in this but for carrying himselfe like a positive Theologue nor so only but like a peremptory Theologue contenting himselfe to dictate rules to others without all proofe save this that otherwise we make God the Authour of sinne Yet this is not any expresse Argument of his neither but he obtrudes premise upon us which I thinke was never affirmed by any Divines of these dayes unlesse it be by some Libertines against whom none that I know have disputed more effectually then some of those very Divines which here are traduced by him But observe the vile and abominable issue of this Authours doctrine in this particular making man as he is a free creature to be the Lord of his own free act yea and to have the absolute dominion thereof as formerly he did expesse Sect 3. For seing the act of faith of repentance and the like are free acts if liberty cannot be maintained unlesse a man hath the absolute dominion of his own act hence it manifestly followeth that God doth not determine the will to believe to repent or to any good work yet the Scripture professeth that God is he who makes us perfect unto every good worke working in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Iesus Christ That it is God who worketh in us both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure So that if a man should live Methusalch his age and spend that whole time in a gracious conversation yet that God doth worke in him either the will or the deed of one gracious act more it is merely of his good pleasure so little cause have we to presume of perseverance in that which is good by out own strength And againe all this God workes in us for Christ his sake Christ hath deserved even this at the hands of God his father What then is the meaning of this that God should cooperate with us to the will and the deed provided that we will Consider the absurdity of this upon the supposall of the possibility of such a cooperation which yet by evident reason may be demonstrated to be utterly impossible Did Christ merit any thing for the Angells yet doth he not cooperate with them to every act of theirs as well as to any of ours Nay is it possible that any act should exist without God's operation And is it reasonable to subject such a course of Divine providence to the merits of Christ Thus we see whereunto this Authour tends in this discourse of his namely so to maintaine God to be no Authour of sinne as withall to maintaine that he is no Authour of that which is good no not of faith repentance or any gracious act that is freely performed by any creature man or Angell we on the other side desire endeavour so to carry our selves that while we vindicate God from being the Authour of evill we may not therewithall deny him to be the Authour of any thing that is good and gracious which is this Authours course as appeares manifestly in the issue And observe his crafty cariage foxe like Had he dealt upon predestination and the efficacy of grace and therein professed plainly that faith and repentance being free acts every man's will hath an absolute dominion over them and therefore God doth not determine the will thereunto For that were to make God the Authour of faith and repentance how many thousands would have been ready to have flowen in his face and abhorre such abominable doctrine Therefore he baulks that and deales only upon reprobation and here he layeth to our charge that we make God the Authour of sinne by necessitating and determining the will to sinne though his premises herein I have shewen to be most false therefore he maintains that God doth not determine the will so much as to the act whereunto the sinfulnesse accrewes both because man's will is free and because so he should be the Authour of sinne And if once he can make his Reader to swallow this he doubts not but to take him in the point of predestination and grace also and make him wary to take heed of maintaining that God determines or necessitates the will of man to any good act whether it be of faith or of repentance and that for feare of denying man to have the absolute dominion over his will to worke himselfe to faith and repentance at his pleasure and secondly for feare of makeing God the Authour of faith and repentance and every good act Like as by saying that God doth determine or necessitate the will to sinne we make him the Authour of sinne
men devise God and man to move to the producing of the same act as two men in lifting a timber logge most indecently And to free this concurrence from chance they say sometimes that God workes this or that act in us modo velimus that is upon condition that we will But when they consider that God workes the act of willing as well as ought else are demanded to answer upon what condition he workes this what condition will they devise of this will he say modo velimus provided that we will As much as to say God will produce the act of willing provided that it be produced already by us Others say that God foreseeing that the will of man at such a time will produce such an act of willing in case God be pleased to concurre to the producing of it hereupon he resolves to concurre to the producing of it whereby the finall resolution is rather into the will of God then into the will of the creature I say the finall resolution of every sinfull act committed by the creature Secondly here is devised a thing future without all ground For whereas the act of willing as for example in Iudas the act of willing to betray his Master is it in ' its own nature merely possible not future how then did it passe into the condition of a thing future and that from everlasting For from everlasting God knew it as a thing future this could not be done without a cause And what cause could there be of an eternall effect but an eternall cause which is God alone And in God nothing can be devised to be the cause thereof but his will or decree Therefore to avoid this they must be driven to conclude that all future things became future by necessitie of nature if not of their own nature yet at least by the necessitie of God's nature he producing them all not freely but by necessitie of nature This is that Atheisticall necessitie whereupon our Adversaries are cast while they oppose such a necessitie as depends upon God's decree ordaining all things to come to passe agreably to their natures necessary things necessarily contingent things contingently and accordingly ordaining necessary causes working necessarily for the producing of the one and contingent causes working contingently for the producing of the other as Aquinas discourseth 1. pag q. 19 in the Article whose title is this Utrum divina voluntas necessitatem rebus imponat whether the will of God imposeth a necessitie on things that come to passe in the world The reason this Authour brings is a mere Socysme saying the same over and over againe As when he saith For when two causes concurre to the producing of an effect the one principall overruling cause the other but an instrumentall wholly at the devotion of the principall then is the effect in all reason to be imputed to the principall which by the force of ' its influxe and impression produceth it rather then to the subordinate and instrumentall which is but a mere servant in the production of it To which I answer that which he calls overruling I have often shewed how absurdly it is imputed unto us For how can that be called overruling which workes not the will contrary to ' its nature but moves it only agreably to the nature thereof As for the cause principall what Scholar of any braines ever denyed God to be the cause principall in any action to the producing whereof he concurres For is he not the first cause and the first Agent Are not all other second causes and second Agents But this Authour hopes his Reader will understand this in reference only to the sinne not to the naturall act under it whereas God as touching the sinfullnesse of it is no Agent at all much lesse a prime Agent no cause at all much lesse a prime cause Then secondly let God never so effectually work any creature to the producing of an act connaturall thereunto yet if he works the creature therunto agreably to its nature that is if it be an necessary Agent moues it to worke necessarily if it be a contingent agent moves it to worke contingently if it be a free agent moves it to worke freely then by Arminius his confesion our cause is gained For God shall be found free from blame and the creature void of excuse Now this is clearly our doctrine and in effect the doctrine of all them who say that God determines the will as the Dominicans or that God necessitates the will as Bradwardine For they all acknowledge hereby that God moves the creature to worke freely in such sort that in the very act of working they might doe otherwise if they would They confesse this providence of God is a great mystery and not sufficiently comprehensible by humane reason Cajetan professeth thus much as before alleadged and Alvarez maintaines it in a set disputation And supposing God's concourse as necessarily required to every act of the creature they are able to prove by evident demonstration that no other concourse can be admitted then this whereby God moves every creature and that effectually to every act thereof but agreably to ' its nature and condition And this is farther demonstrated by God's fore knowledge of things future Another Arminian with whom I have had to deale in this argument being pressed with this reason drawen from God's foreknowledge and urged to shew how things possible became future that from everlasting for from everlasting they were known to God as future had no way to helpe selfe but by flying to the actuall existence of all things in eternity And I have good ground for strong presumption that this Authour with whom now I deale had his hand in that Pye which was above foure yeares agoe See the desperate issue of these mens discourses who are drawen to take hold of such a Tenet to helpe themselves withall which their best freinds the Jesuites the Authours of Scientia media doe utterly disclaime And on the other side the Dominicans who embrace the actuall existence of all things in eternity are utterly repugnant to the doctrine of Scientia media So that when the Jesuites are reconciled to the Dominicans in the point of actuall existence of all things in eternity And the Dominicans to the Jesuites in the point of Scientia media then these men with whom I deale are like to prevaile which I doubt will hardly be before Elias comes Thirdly consider if when one cause is principall overruling the other the effect must be imputed rather to the principall then to the other It followes evidently that when the causes doe equally concurre without any such overruling of one the other then the effect is equally imputable unto each consequently the sin For such is this Authour's language in this Argument is equally imputable to both to God as well as man And he is to be accounted the Author of it as well as man I appeale to every man's
I consider this Authour's compounding of these termes absolutely and antecedently I begin to suspect that like as then a thing comes to passe antecedently when it comes to passe by an Antecedent decree in this Authour's language though most absurd So in his language the things are said to come to passe by absolute necessity when they come to passe by an absolute decree the decree in his opinion being sufficient to make a thing come to passe necessarily an absolute decree to make it come to passe absolutely necessarily This undoubtedly is his meaning upoÌ„ which I am stuÌ„bled are I am aware Now let the sober Reader judge how farre these odde conceits are from all sobriety Did not God decree to make the world nay did he not absolutely decree this and antecedently not conditionally and consequently What therefore will it here-hence follow that the world had it's existence necessarily and that by the way of absolute necessity I had thought this had been the peculiar and incommunicable perfection of God himselfe namely to exist necessarily and that in the way of absolute necessity As for all other things which are but God's creatures they have only a contingent existence derived originally from the free will of God the Creator For this I take to be the transcendent perfection of God To be most necessarily to worke most freely Necessity and that absolute being the greatest perfection of being So that Bradwardine conceives this to be the prime and originall perfection of God esse necessario to be necessarily On the other side freedome in the highest kind is the greatest perfection 〈◊〉 operation and God alone so workes as without subordination to any superiour Agent but no creature man or Angell so workes as without subordination to God the first Agent the first cause the first free worker Now I come 〈◊〉 the second particular of this second inconvenience 2. And that is that our doctrine taketh away the conscience of sin and this we willingly grant is consequent upon the former For if sinne be no sinne there is no cause why any man should be troubled with the conscience of sin But all this being grounded upon a vile and most untrue imputation never yet proved namely that we make all actions both good and evill to come to passe by absolute necessity there can be no more truth in the consequent then there is in the Antecedent We say that every sinne that is or ever was committed in the world is and ever was committed freely not only voluntarily much lesse doth any sinne come to passe by any absolute necessity For albeit there be some things that come to passe necessarily by necessity of nature as proceeding from Agents naturall working naturally and necessarily Yet is no worke of nature wrought by any absolute necessity God being able to set an end to nature and the works thereof whensoever it pleaseth him and while nature continueth according to the good pleasure of God he restraines the course thereof or changeth it as he thinks good How much lesse doe the actions of men not only in respect of God's agency who is the first cause but in respect of man's agency a second cause and working deliberately and freely come to passe not necessarily but contingently and freely So farre off are they from comming to passe by absolute necessity to exist by absolute necessity being the incommunicable perfection of God himselfe But I confesse this Authour sheweth some humanity in the proofe of it to wit out of the Tragedian very judiciously and learnedly Fati est ista culpa nemo fit fato nocens It is the fault of fate or destiny and what comes to passe by destiny is no fault of man's Yet Zeno the great Patron of Fate finding his servant in a fault when his servant excused himselfe upon fate saying it was destiny that he should steale made a ready answer saying Et caedo it was his destiny also to be punished So farre was he from justifying or excusing his servant upon any such ground or forbearing to punish him And doth not this Authour know that Iocasta for all her acknowledgment of fate governing all things yet in conscience of her incestuous courses destroyed her selfe in the same Tragedian But consider indifferent Reader whether this Authour doth not carry himselfe as if he were dealing with little children and his purpose were not to informe them but to abuse and mocke them For is that all waies the faith or opinion of the Tragedian whatsoever he puts into the mouthes of this or that Actor Doe not they represent the absurd pretences of some as well as the reasonable discourses of others Then againe who are they that maintaine Fatum destiny Where hath he found this maintained by any of our divines Yet I confesse this Authour deales ingeniously in one thing to wit in walking so fairely in the steps of this forefathers For thus the Pelagians accused the doctrine of Austin not only after he was dead as appeares by Prosper's Epistle ad Ruffinum but even while he was living as appeares by Austin himselfe Nec sub nomine gratiae fatum asserimus quia nullis hominum meritis dicimus Dei gratiam antecedi Si autem quibusdam omnipotentis Dei voluntatem placet fati nomine nuncupari profanas quidem verborum novitates evitamus sed de verbis contendere non amamus neither doe we maintain destiny under the name of grace in saying grace is not prevented by any merits of man But if some are pleased to call the will Allmighty God by the name of faâ—e or destiny we avoid the profane novelties of words but we doe not love to strive about words Where observe how first the same crimination was made against Austin's doctrine by the Pelagians which this Authour makes against ours 2. The doctrine which the Pelagians opposed in this crimination was this Grace is not conferr'd according unto workes 3ly Austin disavowes all antecedency of workes to the bestowing of grace how much more to the decreeing of grace to be bestowed on any which yet is the beloved Helena of this Authour therefore he talkes so oft against an Antecedent decree Then againe it is manifest that the greatest maintainers of destiny and sate did not maintaine it in any opposition to the free wills of men And Austin him selfe professeth that such a necessity as is expressed in these words Necesse est ut fiat it must needs be that such a thing shall come to passe containes no inconvenience nor is any way prejudiciall to the free wills of men His words are these Sienim necessitas nostra ida dicenda est quae non est in nostra 〈◊〉 â—â—detiamsi nelumus efficit quod potest sicut est necessitas mortis ManifestuÌ„ est 〈◊〉 nostras quibus recte aut perperam vivitur sub tale necessitate non esse Multaâ—â—im 〈◊〉 quae si nolemus non facerimus Si autem illa desinitur esse necessitas
a thing it is for any man to maintaine that there is some cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So as mad a thing it must be every way to avouch that there is a cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And truely the Apostle St. Paul plainly manifests that upon what ground he proves that Election is not of good works namely because before Iacob or Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said The elder shall serve the younger upon the same ground we may be bold to conclude that Reprobation is not of evill workes And the same reason manifests that faith and infidelity are excluded from being the causes the one of Election the other of Reprobation as well as good and evill workes And both Piscator by evidence of Scripture and Bradwardine by evidence of reason have demonstrated that no will of God is conditionall which is to be understood as touching the act of God willing And it may be evidently further demonstrated thus If any thing be the cause of God's will then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as is evident and all confesse there being no colour of truth for that besides such an opinion were most dangerously prejudiciall to God's soveraignty and liberty If therefore they say it is by the constitution of God maske I pray what an insuperable absurdity followeth hereupon For seing God's constitution is his will it followeth that God did will that upon foresight of this or that he would will such a man's salvation and such a man's damnation And thus the act of God's will is made the Object of God's will even the eternall act of God's will Whereas to the contrary it is apparent that the objects of God's will are things temporall never any thing that is eternall But as touching things willed we readily grant it may be said there is a cause thereof as School-Divines doe generally acknowledge And thus Gerardus Vossius speaks of the conditionall will which he faith the Fathers doe ascribe to God For this is the instance which he gives thereof as for example when God ordaines to bestow salvation on a man in case he believe here faith is made the condition of Salvation but not of the will of God And in like manner we willingly grant that reprobation is conditionall inasmuch as God intends to inflict damnation on none but such as die in sin without repenance But albeit predestination as touching this particular thing willed may be said to be conditionall according as the School-men explicate their meaning and reprobation likewise as touching the particular of dānatiō mētioned yet no such thing cā be truely affirmed either of the one or of the other as touching the particulars of grāting or denying the grace of règeneratiō which are intended also by the decrees of predestinatiō reprobatiō For albeit God intends not to bestow salvation on any but upon condition of faith nor damnation on any but upon condition of finall impenitency and infidelity Yet God intends not to bestow the grace of regeneration on some for the curing of their naturall infidelity and impenitency Nor to leave the same infidelity and impenitency uncured in others by denying the same grace of regeneration unto them This I say God doth not intend to bring to passe upon any condition For if he should then grace should be conferred according unto works which was condemned in the Synod of Palestine and all along in divers Synods and Councells against the Pelagians So that albeit God proceeds according to a law in bestowing salvation and inflicting damnation yet he proceeds according to no law in giving or denying the grace of regeneration for the curing of our naturall corruption but merely according to the pleasure of his will as the Apostle testifies saying He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And if the conferring and denying of this grace be absolute how much more are the decrees hereof to be accounted most absolute And consequently that one man is delivered from the power of his sins whether originall or habituall another is not but still continueth under the power of them This I say doth must needs come to passe by vertue of Gods absolute decrees Yet no absolute necessity followeth hereupon First because no greater necessity then that which is absolute can be attributed to the existence and continuance of God himselfe Secondly God did absolutely decree to make the world yet no wise man was ever known to affirme that the worlds existence was and is by absolute necessity In like sort God did absolutely decree that Iosiah should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar That Cyrus should build his Citty and let goe his captives That no man should desire the Israelites land when they should come to appeare before the Lord their God thrice in the yeare That God would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their children to love the Lord their God withall their heart and with all their soule To put his feare in their hearts that they should never depart away from him To cause them to walke in his statutes and judgments to doe them To worke in them both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure Yea to worke in them every thing that is pleasing in his sight through Iesus Christ Likewise that Absolom should defile his fathers Concubines that the Jewes should crucify the Son of God that some through disobedience should stumble at the word that the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast Yet these actions were done by them as freely as ever they did ought in their lives All these things I say by Scripture evidence were decreed by God to come to passe The good by God's effection the evill by God's permission and decreed absolutely on their parts that did them if not let it be shewed upon what condition on Absolon's part he should defile his fathers Concubines upon what condition on the Jewes part they should crucify the Son of God upon what condition on their part others through disobedience should stumble at God's word And upon what condition on their part the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast And if they take Arminias his way let them reply upon mine answere to Arminius if Bellarmin's let them reply upon my answer to Bellarmine that we may not trouble the world with out Tautologies If a different way from both these I shall be glad to be acquainted with it give it such entertainement as according to my judgment it shall be found to deserve So that with Epiphanius though we are ready to concurre in denying destiny which as before we heard out of him was a necessity derived from the starres yet with Austin we may still hold that the wills of men need not to be exempted from all necessity to maintaine the liberty
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
have answered it and shewed the absurd interpretation that he makes of it He vaunts that he hath proved reprobation absolute to be unjust when he hath performed no thing lesse But making only a greate cracke he goes out like a squib and throughout meddles not with one argument that our Divines bring out of Scripture or reason to justifie their doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of reprobation And it is apparent that he denies the absolutenesse of election as well as the absolutenesse of reprobation and consequently must necessarily maintaine that grace is given according to works whereupon it was that Austin grounded his doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of Predestination And upon the like ground have we as good cause to ground our doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of reprobation it being every way as evident that Grace is not denied according unto works as that it is not granted according to mens works And the Scripture is equally as expresse concerning both where it is said that as God hath mercy on whom he will so also whom he will he hardneth Pag 75. 76. Treating of God's sincerity Sub-sect 1. There are two passages inserted taken out of Piscator before the passages alleadged out of Zanchy and Bucer For having said that Now God's meaning is by this doctrine that the most of those to whom he offereth his grace and glory shall have neither forthwith he gives instance in Piscator thus And so Piscator saith Grace is not offered by God even to those who are called with a meaning to give it but to the Elect only Gratia non offertur à Deo singulis â—licet vocatis animo communicandi eam sed solis electis In the same booke he hath such an other speech Non vult Deus reprobos credere liâ—etliâ—gua profiteatur se velle Though God in words protest he would have reprobates to believe yet indeed he will not have them they make God to deale with men in matters of salvation as the Poets feigne the Gods to have dealt with poore Tantalus They placed him in a cleare and goodly river up to the very chin and under a tree which bare much sweet and pleasant fruit that did almost touch his lips but this they did with a purpose that he should tast of neither For when he put his mouth to the water to drinke it waved away from him And when he reached his hand to the fruit to have eaten of it it withdrew it selfe presently out of his reach so as he could neither eate nor drinke Just so dealeth God with reprobates by their doctrine He placeth them under the plentifull meanes of salvation offereth it to them so plainly that men would thinke they might have it when they will yet intendeth fully they shall never have it withholding from them either the first grace that they cannot believe or the second grace that they cannot persevere Did not those gods delude Tantalus yes doubtlesse And if God doe so with reprobates what did he but delude them and dissenible with them in his fairest and likeliest offers of salvation that he makes them And this doe Zanchius and Bucer grant by evident consequence as appeareth by a speech or two of theirs which cannot stand with their conclusion and therefore I suppose fell unwarily from them This treatise of Piscator De praedestinatione against Schaffman I have the second editition printed at Herborne Anno 1598. But these words according to their quotations here are not to be found the severall distinct passages are distinguished by numbers which in all editions hold the same not so the pages Yet the latter passage quoted p. 143. I meet with in mine p. 128. According to the like difference I try whether I can find out the other but in vaine But yet I meet with such matter of discourse as whereunto this passage is very congruous to be there delivered if any where yet no such thing is there delivered as num 74. Schaffman's argument is this If God calls all to salvation then he will save all To this Piscator answereth The proposition is false But he calls with animo simplici atque vero a simple mind and true Sane saith Piscator as much as to say I grant that but so as that he calls them with condition of repentance and faith Therefore as he promiseth salvation seriously unto them that performe this condition and therefore performes this promise So on the contrary he doth seriously threaten death and damnation to them who doe not fulfill the condition and performes unto him that commination Then though God be not capable of hypocrisy yet he doth not alwaies will that what he commands shall be alwaies performed by him to whom he gives that command Whether by commanding he meanes to prove a man as to prove Abraham he commanded him to sacrifice his Son or because to him whom he commandeth he will not give grace to performe that command as he deales with reprobates And num 120. To Schaffman's objection which was this God is no hypocrite he answers thus But yet he gives not grace to all to performe what he commands theÌ„ For promiscuously he commands as well reprobates as elect to believe as many as he calls by the preaching of the gospell but he gives this grace to his elect alone according to that To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdome of heaven but to them it is not given So that undoubtedly God offers grace to wit pardon of sinne with a purpose to communicate it to all that shall believe according to the judgment of Piscator neither doth he offer it with a purpose to communicate it to any unlesse they believe But the grace of faith is not offered to any with a purpose to communicate it upon a condition For then grace should be conferred according unto works which is manifest Pelagianisme As for the other which I meete with p 128. num 120 take it at full and not as it is dismembred by this Authour who cares not how he calumniates so he might advantage his own cause Schaffman's objection was Deus est unius linguae voluntatis God is both of the same tongue and will Whereto Piscator answers thus Your meaning is that God look what he professeth with his tongue that he willeth But this saith he is not alwaies true nor in all particulars For by his tongue that is by speech uttered he professed that he would have Abraham to sacrifice his Son Isaac yet he would not have him sacrificed With his tongue he professed by his servant Ionas that he would destroy Nineveh within forty dayes yet he would not so doe With his tongue by the ministers of the Gospell he professeth that he would have the reprobates to whom he speaketh among his Elect to believe the Gospell in as much as he commands them so to doe yet he would not have them to believe in as much as he will not
indurare tum aeterno exitio perdere idque ut in illis divina bonitas et misericordia in istis autem divina potentia et justitia declaretur atque ita in omnibus deus glorificetur Where if you marke it well you shall find he makes no order between the decrees of creation permission of sin liberation and salvation on the one side of induration and damnation on the other side but onely between creation it selfe and permission of sin and liberation it selfe and salvation on the one side and dereliction and damnation on the other side all which he considers as meanes and in the last place notes the end of all to be the patefaction of Gods glory in goodnesse and mercy on the one side and of his power and justice on the other 2. Againe in your first Thesis containing the maine body of your tenet you will have the foresight of the subject or occasion whereupon any thing is decreed absolutely to be wrought alwayes to goe before the decree it selfe as well as the decree of the end goeth before the decree of the meanes The irregularity whereof as touching God though as touching mans decrees I confesse it is right that you speake I will shew as briefly as I can before I answer your reason brought for confirmation of it 1. If the foresight of the subject and occasion goes before the decree of working upon the subject then much more must the decree of making the subject as also of making or permitting the occasion goe before the decree of working upon the subject and upon such an occasion for no subject whereupon God workes can be without Gods making but it is nothing so with man who findes subjects whereupon to worke rather than makes them Now this is a thing impossible For 1. First nothing is first in intention but the end and 't is not possible that the subject or occasion should be the end whereunto God workes upon the subject thus or thus 2. Secondly that which is first in intention is last in execution And therefore if the making of the subject and permitting of the occasion whereupon God meanes to worke were first in intention it should be last in execution that is God should first worke upon the subject before he had made the subject or permitted the occasion whereupon he workes But yet I confesse if you have a reason for what you say unlesse you may receive some satisfactory answer unto that reason of yours it will be a very hard matter to satisfie you Therefore I come to the consideration of your reason which is this The foresight of a thing is nothing but the consideration of it tanquam reipsa certo futurum But whoso will resolve absolutely to work such an effect upon such a definite subject or to make such an use of such a particular event must consider that subject and that event tanquam reipsa futurum for else his decree will be but conditionall To this I answer 1. First according to their opinion that are accounted the most rigid interpreters of predestination 1. Your proposition is most sound 2. As for your assumption which you suppose to be true they suppose to be utterly untrue as directly contrary to the most generall rules touching the order of things in intention and execution And Alphonsus Mendoza takes upon him to prove at large that the supernaturals of Peter and Paul were intended before their naturals 2. The onely reason saving the plausibility of the proposition it selfe to justifie it seems to be this God cannot worke upon a subject unlesse the subject first be and that occasion also whereupon he works therefore God cannot intend to work upon a subject unlesse first he intend to produce that subject and permit at least the occasion whereupon he intends to work As much as to say because I cannot ride to London without a horse therefore I cannot intend to ride to London unlesse first I intend to get me a horse Whence it manifestly followeth that in execution I must first ride to London and afterward get me an horse to that purpose And the confounding of the order of execution with the order of intention seems to be the cause why this proposition of yours seems to be so plausible 2. Now I will answer your proposition according to my own Tenet in ordering Gods decrees which is likely to give you better satisfaction in the way of your own apprehension Now I grant your proposition acknowledging that in this case so it falls out that he must needs consider the subject as reipsa certo futurum But how non tanquam praecedaneum whereto your discourse tends but tanquam conjunctum the reason is because I make the decrees of creation permission of sin and raysing out of sin not subordinata but coordinata conjuncta So I say in like manner God doth joyntly decree to give both grace and glory I do not say God doth decree joyntly to give them but he joyntly decreeth to give both grace and glory And so Austin defines predestination to be praeparationem gratiae gloriae So that in the same moment that he decreeth glory he considers grace not as praecedaneum in intentione but conjunctum So on the other side God doth joyntly decree finall dereliction of some in sin and damnation for sin as Aquinas professeth of reprobation that it includes voluntatem permittendi culpam damnationem inferendi pro culpa so that in the same moment that he decreeth damnation he considereth their finall impenitency non tanquam quiddam antecedaneum but tanquam conjunctum And judge you what force this hath to qualifie the harshnesse of Tenets hereabouts and what disadvantage to our opposites the Arminians who upon the subordination of these decrees cry out upon our Tenets and expose them to obloquie saying that we maintaine that God doth first decree to damne men and then to this purpose he exposeth them to sinne those sinnes for which they are damned And herewith they charge the Authors of Massa corrupta for the object of election and reprobation aswell as the Authors of Massa nondum condita or condita but nondum corrupta And the twenty reasons which Arminius hath given against the Authors of Massa nondum condita he professeth that with little difference they may be accommodated against the Fautors of Massa corrupta All which notwithstanding I have considered and I hope refuted also both the one way against Arminius and the other way against Corvinus in a Digression by it selfe which containes a whole quire of paper one of them but that is in my answer to Corvinus which is not yet perfected Doctor Jackson my ancient friend partly by his traditionary writings that passe in hugger-mugger from hand to hand four pieces whereof as many as I could come by I have answered and partly by his treatise of divine essence withdrawing my studies another away yet an answer to that I hope to smith by Whitsontide
of eternall life Now I pray consider who are those wicked men whom God thus gives over to their lusts Were we not all such Did not God find us all weltering in our bloud Ezek. 16. Had not we all stony hearts Ezek. 36. Were we not all blind lame deafe nay were we not dead in sinnes Ephes 2. 1. Did not the Gospell find the Ephesians so Did not the Word of truth find the Jewes so James 1. 18. How then comes this difference that Christ is a stumbling blocke to some and not to others We say the difference is because God hath mercy on some and hardens others Rom. 9. 18. Because some are borne of God therefore they heare Gods Word others are not borne of God and therefore they heare not Gods word Ioh. 8. 47. The Arminians say God giveth power to every one by an universall grace to will any good whereto he shall be excited So when the Gospell is Preached every one hath power to obey it if he doth obey it then Christ is a precious stone to him but if it disobey it then he is given up to the lusts of his heart and permitted to dash against Christ and other meanes of eternall life Here we have a phrase but we are to seeke of the meaning thereof what is it to dash against Christ It must needs be to commit some sinne or other for that is the object of Gods permition for of all other things God is acounted the Author not the permitter the object of permition is nothing but sinne now what sinne can that be whereby we are said to dash against Christ and other meanes of salvation but disobedience to Christ and to the meanes of grace so that from the first to the last the sence comes to this as many as disobey Christ and the meanes of grace they are given over to the lusts of their hearts and permitted to dash against Christ and other means of eternall life that is are permitted to disobey Christ and to resist other means of eternal life So that their disobedience to Christ and the Gospell is very punctually and juditiously set downe to precede by two degrees their disobedience to Christ and his Gospell Some may thinke that this Arminian prosilite doth not carry himselfe well in his businesse and for betraying the nakednesse of his cause may be in dainger to be excommunicated out of their Synagogue But Sir you must believe it this is the very leprosy of their Doctrine that over spreds it from the crowne of the head to the sole of the foot and they are in love with it accounting it not only sanity but perfect beauty God indeed is said in Scripture to give men over to their lusts when he forbears either courses of admonition and reproofe by his word or by his judgements in his workes or when he forbears to restraine Satan as formerly he did but disobedience to the Gospell undoubtedly is hoc ipso a dashing against Christ although God may continue to admonish and exhort even to the end as to prophane and hypocriticall persons in the Church he gives not over this course of his untill the end I have often represented the absurdity of this Authors conceit of a gracious intent in God of promoting the eternall good of Reprobates whereas it cannot be denied that God hath from everlasting intended their damnation and as for our saying that God intends they shall be without excuse that Christ is set up for their falling that the Gospell is unto God a sweet savour in Christ not only in them that are saved but in them that perish This Author is so farre from overthrowing the truth of it that besides other absurdities delivered by him in the way the Author himselfe hath no heart to deny it only saying that God intends it not primarily which is rather to grant that he intends it though not primarily as whereabouts there is no question than to deny it and that occasionally they are so whereas no man but himselfe hath said in saying that they doe effect this end that Christ or the Gospell are the cause hereof but only that they are the occasion But this hinders not Gods intention of them For undoubtedly God intends as well things occasioned as things caused though not in his first thoughts and resolutions which belongs rather to the end than to the meanes to wit to be first intended So that in plaine tearmes he hath not hitherto dared to deny that God intends them though he manifests a good mind to maintaine that they come to passe accidentally and casually in respect of God For he spares not to professe that the scorching of men and the hurting of weake eyes falls out accidentally and that to God for he proposeth this by way of distinction from that which God intends which he saith is the chearing of men by the light of the Sunne like as here he denies that mens stumbling at Christ is a thing intended by God like as in saying a sinnefull event is not properly under Gods will and decree but under his prescience only or at most under a permissive decree And this I confesse is a very plausible doctrine in the judgement of flesh and bloud save that this Authors faint carriage in the delivering of it is enough to make a man suspect it as plausible as it is yet it is hardly true and sound For he dares not say that a sinfull event is not at all under Gods decree only that he saith it is not properly under Gods decree But Saint Peter speaking of them that stumbled at the word of God through disobedience professeth in plaine termes that hereunto they were ordained 1 Pet. 2. 6. And all the Apostles there assembled Acts 4. 28. Doe professe that both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and people of Israell were gathered together against the Holy Sonne of God to doe what Gods hand and Gods counsell had determined before to be done And ere I part I hope to prove that any sinfull act that comes to passe in the world is as properly intended of God as any good act whatsoever although there be a vast difference in the bringing of them forth God causing the one only permitting the other as it is evill And that because it comes under Gods prescience it is well they are not so Atheistical as to deny Gods prescience but I doubt not to make it good that either they must deny that every thing comes under Gods prescience or they must grant that every thing comes under Gods decree For consider nothing can be foreknowne of God as future unlesse it be future Now let us quietly enquire how any thing becomes future and if any cause hereof can with reason be devised without the decree of God let us all become Arminians and deny God either at all to be or to be a free agent but working by necessity of nature For if future things be future of their own
nature then all things must be acknowledged to come to passe by necessity of their owne nature which is to deny God But if things be of their owne nature meerly possible and indifferent to become either future or non-future then there must be acknowledged some cause whereby they are brought out of the condition of things meerly possible into the condition of things future And this cause must exist from everlasting otherwise it should not be so ancient as the effect thereof for it is well knowne that all things future have been future from everlasting otherwise God could not have foreknown them from everlasting but all confesse that God from everlasting foreknew every future thing Therefore the cause making them to passe out of the condition of things meerely possible such as they were of their owne nature into the condition of things future was also from everlasting Now consider where was this cause to be found Not without God for nothing without God either was or is everlasting without beginning therefore is it to be found within God or no where Consider in the next place what is that within God which is fit to be the cause hereof We say 't is his decree but this Author cannot away with that Therefore Si quid novisti rectius isto candidus imperti Certainly the knowledge of God cannot be the cause for as Aquinas saith that causeth nothing but as joyned with Gods will and therefore it is commonly conceived that foreknowledge doth rather presuppose things future than make them so nothing then remaines to be the cause hereof but the essence of God Now the essence of God may be considered two waies either as working necessarily or as working freely if it be the cause of things future as working necessarily then it followeth that God shall produce them by necessity of nature which utterly overthrowes Divine providence What remaines then but that we must be driven to confesse that Divine essence makes them future as working freely which is as much as to professe that Gods will and decree is that alone which maketh things to passe out of the condition of things meerly possible in to the condition of things future And I challenge the whole Nation of Arminians and Jesuites to answer this argument Yet this decree we willingly acknowledge is a permissive decree but look that we understand that aright also thus God decreeth this or that evill to come to passe by his permission like as good things he decreeth shall come to passe by his effection and that upon Gods permission it is necessary that that which he permits shal come to passe is acknowledged not only by our Divines but by Vorstius by Arminians by Navarettus the Dominican as I have quoted thē in my Vinditiae gratiae Dei which yet they deliver without clear expressing how which I perform thus look what God decrees to permit it is necessary that it should come to passe but how Not necessarily but contingently freely And the Scripture is expresse as before expressed that the most barbarous actions cōmited against Christ by Herod Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israell in their contumelious usages of him were all predetermined by the hand and counsell of God Marke the issue of this Authors most frivolous discourses for this will whereof he speakes whereby God is pretended gratiously to will mans Salvation conditionall as much as to say 't is Gods will that a man shall be Saved in case he believe in Christ now what Christian was ever known to deny this Secondly consider whether this deserves to be called a will to save more than a will to damne for like as 't is certaine a man shall be saved if he believe in Christ so it is most certaine a man shall be damned if he believe not and withall consider to which of these the nature of man is most prone whether to faith or to infidelity DISCOURSE SECT VII BUt by this opinion the gifts of nature and grace have another end either God doth not meane them unto those that perish albeit they doe enjoy them because they are mingled in the world with the elect to whom only they are directed or if he doe he meaneth they shall have them and by them be lifted up above the common rank of men ut lapsu graviore ruant that their fall may be the greater for how can God intend that those men should receive them or any good by any of them whom he hath by an absolute decree cut off and rejected utterly from grace and glory More particularly by this doctrine 1. Christ came not into the world to procure the Salvation of them that perish because they were inevitably preordained to perish 2. The word is not sent to them or if it be it is that they might slight it or contemne it and increase their damnation by the contempt of it and so these inconveniences will arise 1. That God is a meere deceiver of miserable men whom he calls to Salvation in the name of his Sonne by the preaching of his word because he fully intends to most men the contrary to that which he fairly pretends 2. That Ministers are but false witnesses because in their Ministry they offer Salvation conditionally to many who are determined to damnation absolutely 3. The Ministry of the Word canot leave men inexcusable for Reprobates may have this just plea Lord dost thou punish for not believing in thy Sonne when thou didest call us to believe by the preaching of thy Word thou didest decree to leave us woefull men in Adams sinne to leave us neither power to believe nor a Christ to believe in how canst thou justly charge us with sinne or encrease our punishment for not believing in him whom thou didest resolve before the world was that we should never believe in That Ministry gives men a faire excuse which is given to no other end than to leave them without excuse 4. The Sacraments by this opinion signify nothing seale up conferre nothing to such as are not Saved but are meere blankes and empty ordinances unto them not through the fault of men but by the primary and absolute will of God 5. Lastly other gifts bestowed upon men of what nature soever they be are to the most that receive them in Gods absolute intention 1. Unprofitable such as shall never doe them good in reference to their finall condition 2. Dangerous and hurtfull given them not of love but extreame hatred not that they might use them well and be Blessed in so doeing but that they might use them ill and by ill using of them procure unto themselves the greater damnation God lifts them up as the Divell did Christ to the pinacle of the Temple that they might fall and loades them with knowledge and other goodly indowments that with the weight of them he might sink them into Hell and so by good consequence Gods chiefest gifts are intended and laid as snares
corrupt affections and customes as to make the last resolution of our faith concerning the waies of God thereunto or the understanding of such as he is whether best or worst or of both sizes upon a mere pretence of their indifferency for the entertainement of truths We willingly grant with Zanchy that God can will nothing which is not just Not that hereby we make any justice to precede the will of God but because he hath a lawfull power to doe what he will And there is a justice of condency consequent to all his actions It is otherwise I confesse with a man though the greatest of men as wise as Solomon though vessells after God's own heart as David But hence it followeth not that because in an earthly King there is a justice antecedent to his will therefore it is so in the King of heaven and earth If this Authour thinke otherwise let him know I am not yet sufficiently convicted of the purity of his understanding purged from prejudice and false principles c. as thereinto to make the last resolution of my faith Yet I confesse he carrieth himselfe magnificently as if he had attained to this purgation as when he saith That these absolute decrees of salvation and damnation are not part of God's revealed will But where hath he proved the conditionall decrees that he stands for are any part of God's revealed will Where doth he find that God decreed to bestow faith and repentance upon a man because of some good works of his or deny it to others for failing of some good worke As for salvation and damnation we plainly professe that God intended not to damne any man but for sinne nor to bestow salvation on any man of ripe yeares but by way of reward of his faith repentance obedience and good works Doth not he begge the question all along whē he carrieth his conditionall decrees in a confidentiary manner without once offering to prove thè by any one place of Scripture Here Iexpected he would not begge the question when he chargeth us to begge the question most insipidly When it is well known that our Divines are frequent in proving their doctrine out of Scripture which if it faile of sound proofe in the judgment of his understanding purged from prejudice and false principles yet with no modesty whatsoever their judgment be can he taxe them for begging the question For to begge the question is not once to offer to prove what they say which is this Authour's discourse all along But to supply the place of arguments he usually foist's in a phrase at pleasure in expressing our Tenet of God's decrees as of Decreeing immutably and unavoidably Or as here he speakes of Damnation and salvation inevitable whereas we doe not use to clogge our own expressions or our Readers apprehensions with any such bugheares We rather say that God decrees all things to come to passe that do come to passe and that agreably to their natures as necessary things necessarily and contingent things to come to passe contingently And surely for doctrines of faith I thinke every sober Christian hath cause to entitle the King to be the Authour of them this Authour doth not so much for his Nay the Scripture to him seemed so evidently to make for us which I desire every wise Reader well to observe that this drave him to such a sluttish shift as to except against our interpretations of Scripture upon noe other ground but this that the Doctrine confirmed thereby is not consonant to the understanding of men purged from prejudice and false principles corrupt affections and customes in the designing of what is just and what is unjust And let every indifferent man judge whether this be not a desperate course carying with it a secret acknowledgment that the Scripture indeed doth favour the way we take in the Doctrine of predestination and reprobation And indeed the ninth to the Romans Gerardus Vossius calls Gorgons head whereby we thinke so evident is the Apostles meaning on our side to turne all our opposites into stones though such vants are none of ours but himselfe it seemes had been stupified by it had he not timely taken hold of Scientia media the Jesuites invention and as vile an invention as ever reasonable men conceived 3. Lastly he tells us like a resolute Sir that absolute reprobation can be no part of God's revealed will and his reason is because it is odious to right reason He doth not shew how it is contrariant to God's word but bravely presumes that his reason is right as if he were of the number of that synedrion whose understandings are purged from prejudice and false principles from corrupt affections and customes and ere he is aware bewraies what he meanes by reason when he attributes hatred unto it And I verily believe his best reason is the strength of his affection By the way let the Reader observe that he is as opposite to absolute election as to absolute reprobation only he dischargeth his right reason and the spleen thereof against absolute reprobation not against absolute election We may easily guesse the true notion of his right reason in this his whole discourse savouring farre more throughout of the foxes then of the Lyons skin Now I have given him six reasons for the absolutenesse of reprobation because he appeales to reason purged from prejudice and false principles and not one of them hath he answered though they went out of my hands now full three yeares agoe I will adventure to give him some reasons for it also out of God's word For I desire to follow the crooked serpent which way soever he winds and turnes Therefore thus I dispute Predestination is absolute therefore reprobation is absolute For if reprobation be not absolute but proceeds according to mens evill works then predestination is not absolute but proceeds according to mens good works whether faith or other obedience according to that of Austin If Esau be hated for the merit of unrighteousnesse incipit Iacob justitiae merito deligi Iacob beginnes to be beloved for the merit of his righteousnesse and a little before Si enim quia praesciebat Deus futura Esaui opera mala propterea eum praedestinavit ut serviret minori propterea praedestinavit Iacob ut ei major serviret quia futura ejus bona opera praesciebat falsum est jam quod ait non ex operibus For if therefore the Lord praedestinated Esau that he should serve the younger because he foresaw his evill works For the same reason he predestinated Iacob that he should rule over the Elder because he foresaw his good works and so false is that which the Apostle saith not of works Now that predestination is absolute I prove thus It is not upon the foresight of faith much lesse of works therefore it is absolute The anteceedent I prove thus That which proceeds according to the good pleasure of the Lord's will is not