grant my premisses and yet by the help of distinction hold fast his Conclusion For he may say Christ died for every man in the world and was the propitiation for the sinnes of the whole world Sufficienter but not intentionaliter Yet this is a Refuge which doth but lay him more open as I shall shew many wayes For since I am upon this subject I am willing to speak of it this once for all and it is the main hinge upon which all turns and doth depend First if that distinction hath sense in it the meaning of it must needs be this That Christ had merits sufficient to have ransom'd all and every man the least drop of his blood was more worth then a world but he did not intend to ransome all and every one he inâ—â— dâ—d all the benefit of his Death and Pâ—ssiâ—n to noâ—e but those few persons who were elected from all Eâ—eâ—nity out of Massa Corrupta and left the greater part of men who were eternally â—eâ—ected or passed by in that Masse to be utterly incapable of being saved by any part of his Merits Which is as much as to fay that he might have been their Saviour not that he is He might if he would because his merits were sufficient but he would not because he did not intend it and he could not intend it in the fulness of Time because he will'd the quite contrary before all Time Whereas the Texts which I alleaged do not speak in the Potential but Indicative Mood It is not said he might have been for his ability or sufficience but expresly that he is the propitiation for the sins of all the world Not aptitudinally but actually such Every Smatterer in Logick will be able to tell Mr. B. that from the act to the aptitude there may be very strong arguing but there can be none at all from the Aptitude to the Act. And therefore Secondly if men may say with any truth That Christ is their Saviour whom he neither doth save nor doth intend to save and did eternally determine he would not have saveable and leaves them without the passive pâ—…er or bare Possibility of being saved yet might have saved them if he had pleased then by the very same reason in all respects a man may say with great Truth That God is the Creator of a thousand worlds besides this and adde the distinction not intentionally but sufficiently because he was able and might have done it if he had pleased Or that he was the Destroyer of this very world 5 or 6 years since because he had been sufficient to have destroyed it if he had not decreed it a longer time of Duration Or that every rich man who is worth more then he owes is truly a payer of all his Debts though he neither doth pay them nor doth intend it but doth intend the contrary because he hath wherewithall abundantly sufficient and might do it if he pleased and were so honestly minded Suppose that Mr. B. were such a mans Creditor who should refuse to pay the greater part of the Debt and yet affirme he paid it all sufficienter non Intentionaliter explaining himself that he was sufficient but never meant it would not Mr. B. call this a lye or a Jeere would he give him any thanks for such a payment how many myriads of Absurdities must inevitably follow if that may truly be said to be which either may be or might have been but never was nor ever will be But Thirdly the vulgar use of the word sufficiently is more unreasonable then so amongst the men of the absolute way For they inferr our Saviour to have been utterly unable and insufficient to have made himselfe a Ransome for all mankinde whilst they say as he was God he had determined the contrary before the Foundations of the Earth were laid For he was not able to resist himselfe or to reverse his irreversible Decree And his Decree of Reprobation say they was such Upon which it follows by their Doctrine that Christ was not sufficient to have saved all the world but only those that could be saved he could not possibly save them to whom he had denied a possibility and the very passive power of being saved From all this together it is as clear as noon-day that they who deny him to be the Saviour of all the world intentionally cannot say with any reason whilst they keep their old principles that he is so much as sufficiently the Saviour of them whom he eternally decreed he would not save but that he is sufficient to have been their Saviour if from all eternity he had been pleased But say they he was not pleased to be their Saviour yea he was pleased not to be so and sure he could not be their Saviour against his will and good pleasure And yet they say he saved all sufficienter who did nothing towards it nor ever had it in his Thoughts That is to say he is their Saviour because he was able and he is not because he would not doe what he was able So that as often as I meet with that distinction the only true sense of it seems to me to be this we know not well what to say but are resolved to hold our own We finde we are beaten but will not yield We want a good Cause but yet we have a good courage We think Christ died not for all the world but wee 'l say it with a reserve because 't is Scripture And therefore one of the abâ—est of Mr. B. his Party was so farr from affirming so absurd a Use of the word sufficient that he rather chose to fall into a contrary error and would have nothing sufficient which is not necessary or to speak his minde more properly which doth not necessitate Whatsoever saith he is produced hath had a sufficient cause to produce it And therefore also voluntary Actions are necessary Into such contrary Absurdities even witty men must needs fall who did at first set out from the very same Error When men are brought to their witts end and know not which way to goe and are asham'd to goe back the clearest Truths are sure to smart for 't Whatsoever they suffer in dispute they stomackfully resolve they will not be silenc't 4. They would make by this distinction a stranger kinde of Amphibologies in holy Scripture then those that were famous or infamous in the antient Oracles of the Heathen For in such sayings as those ibis red bis nunquam Romane peribis two contrary things are very equally signified But in the words of the Apostle there is the greatest simplicity that can be wish't He is the propitiation not for our sins only but also for the sins of the whole world 1 Joh. 2. 2. There can be no plainer speaking then by not only in one clause and but also in another Yet that distinction above mentioned would make an Amphibolia in those
R. Railing leads to five conclusions Ch. 2. p. 44. to p. 50. not warranted by Scripture Ch. 4. p. 13. Reason of what Authority right reason is Ch. 3. p. 103 104 c. Redemption universal Ch. 1. p. 21 22. Special Ch. 3. p. 84 85 c. Universal clear from Scripture p. 86. and flowing immediately from an Article of the Creed in the judgement of Bishop Davenant Ch. 4. p. 11. and is vindicated from Mr. B's attempts p. 29 30 31 32. Remonstrants Ch. 3. p. 144. Reprobation its Cause and Condition Ch. 3. p. 62 63 c. confessed to be conditional by Mr. B. p. 64. c. Positive and Negative an ill distinction p. 65 66 67. Ch. 4. p. 3 4 c. Revealed See Will. Rivet's strange Argument inferr's God the Author of Sin Ch. 4. p. 23 24 25. S. Scripture how used by Mr. B. and how by me Ch. 1. p. 21 22. to 27. and Ch. 3. p. 123 c. Vindicated from being made to make God the Author of sin Ch. 4. p. 33 34 38 39 40. the sad effects of its literal Interpretation where it speaks figuratively p. 47 48. the right way of interpreting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 48. Sin no man above it Ch. 3. p. 81 82. It s cause efficient not deficient only p. 110. to 116. Sinfulnesse cannot be separated from sin nor sin from the act of sinning Ch. 4. p. 42 43 44. See God Sincerity better then Orthodoxie Ch. 4. p. 9. 10. T. Temptation to sin is not sin Ch. 4. p. 63. 64. Tradition of what Authority Ch. 3. p. 103. c. Dr. Twisse against his Brethren the Anti-Remonstrants Chap. 3. p. 123 124 125. His words infer respective degrees Chap. 4. p. 32. Of clashing with Mr. B as p. 44. how strangely mistaken and how sadly defended by Mr. B. p. 60 61 62 63 c. V. Vedelius chargeth the Anti-Remonstrants with Atheisme Ch. 3. p. 126. Vniversal See Redemption W. Will. What the Adversaries do mean by Gods Secret and Revealed will And the absurdities which follow Ch. 4. p. 52 53 54 57 58. The End a Psal 35. 21. b Verse 20. c Verse 11. 12. * If you desire some examples without the labour of searching for them you may turn to that which I have spoken in my following discoveries Chap. 1. Sect. 5. p. 23 24 25 26. and chap. 3. Sect. 31 34 35. and chap. 4. Sect. 21. 24. 28 29. and from Sect. 33. to the end and Sect. 28 p. 110 111 112 116. * Muliebre maximè puerile est vitium Seneâ— de irâ c. 16. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Max. Tyr. Dissert 2. In sapieâ—tem non cadit Injuria Sen. ad Serenum * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Wisd 17. 12. * 2 Tim. 1. 6. Jer. 9. 5. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Arrian Ep. l. 1. c. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Act. 2 13. * Ver. 25. * Acts 28. 4. * Ver. 6. b Correp cor p. 22. * p. 79. he saith he is not at leisure fully to open in what sence But he had partly told us but 14. lines before where he saith expresly God determins that sin shall be done not as a duty but as a fact that shall fall out by the sinfull will of the creature Nor can he meane a conditional determination who is all for absolute And he saith p. 86 87. God doth not only determine all things and actions but their severall modalities too as to the manner of their being whether as necessary contingent or voluntary Now sin must needs be a thing or action or a modality of thing or action And withall it must needs be either necessary contingent or voluntary And of all such modalities he saith that God is the supreme cause p. 87. Again he saith p. 60 61. that God doth stir up wicked men to acts as acts which to the Actors are and will be unjust As if God could stir up David to pollute Bathsheba without stirring him up to his adultery or else that Adultery become no sin See what I shall say ch 4. p. 42 43 44. * Correp Cor. p. 43. 174. a p. 15. ** p. 92. * Michael Servetus procurante id Calvino vivus exustus est Genevae Anno 1553. libenter fateor inquit Calvinus de se ac prae me fero ex me prodiisse Accusatorem Gro. in Vo. pro. pa. Ecc. Spero capitale saltem feret judicium Calvin in Epist. ad Farellum * This I should never have said or thought if Mr. B. himself had not assur'd me under his hand and seal that being a Prebsbyterian he affected much to proceed by the common counsell of the Presbytery Which makes me amaz'd at the injustice of his Dedicatory Epistle p. 7. where he accuseth me for suggesting that thing to him which had been more then suggested by him to me As if he thought it mâ—…crime to beleeve the truth of what he told me and which however he told me in words at length yet have I a better opinion of those men then to think them all guilty of what they were so very early accused to me by Mr. Barlee * At bene consuluerant Ephesii Decreto memoriam teterrimi hominis abolendo nâ—si Theopâ—mpi Ingenium in historiis eum suis comprehendisset Val. Max. l. 8. c. 14. * page 9. * There is a notable example p. 39. where â—he pretends me to have baosted that I am above Sin and by my own power could abstain from it And p. 73. That I am against all second Marriages of Ministers And very many the like in other places which are as groundless as these two enough to let you taste what is likely to be your entertainment Sophocles in Ajace flagellifero Erasm in Adag * Correp Corr. p. 44. a Saepe gravius vidi offendere animos Auditorum eos qui aliena flagitia aperte dixerunt quà m eos qui commiserunâ— Cicerâ— * It is his own expression of himself in his p. 48. b Mortua quin etiam jungebat corpora vivis Virgil. c Nullus imperitus scriptor est qui Lectorem non inveniat similem sui Hieron Epist 36. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 12. 3. ee Matt. 15. 3 7 9 14. c. Matt. 23. 14 33. g 1 Cor 13. 7. 5. h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Aristot. Ethic. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. l Jer. 9. 3. m Prov. 8. 16. * As indeed in this case difficile est Satyram non scribere It is hard to say any thing which will not looke like severity where such enormities must be detected n Jam. 5. 20. o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristot â—th r Prov. 8. 3. s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heâ—â—od 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 1. Of his Correptory Correction * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Polyb. l. 3. b Corr. Corr. p. 10. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Herod in Melpom. c. 3. p. 226. * Familiaribus suis
that from which he blest God he had been personally free Nor that he ever so much as privately rebuked his brethren for what he called an unchristian ungentlemanly unscholarly unneighbourly unecclesiastical thing From hence it will publickly appear that Mr. Barlee had accused his own Dear Brethren of what he judged to be hainous in five respects and that I very justly rebuk't him for it I mean for giving their practice so black a character behinde their backs as he durst not own before their faces So well hath he requited his three special Benefactors for their commendatory Epistles before his Book § 6. That I make God to be worse then the Divel himself p 10. quoting my 24 page Where he knows as well as I. 1. That there are no such words in all my page 2. That what I say of Gods being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is only inferred from that Doctrine which I resist and he defendeth 3. Mr. B. doth make this inference to the reproach of his own opinion which I could never have done that if Gods absolute Decree doth necessitate the misery of all the reprobated Crew and by consequence slay them from all eternity as Christ is said to be slain from the foundation of the world Rev. 13. 8. he is not only inferred to doe more then the Divel but to be worse then the Divel himselfe In what a lamentable case is my Declamator if he be now observed to say 115. that Punishment must needs be decreed before the permission of sin And p. 87. That God is the determiner not only of all things and actions but of their several modalities too c. And Mr. Calvin That Reprobates were predestin'd to that corruption which is the Cause of Condemnation And that no other Cause can be given for the apostacy of Angels then that God did reprobate and reject them Never did I inferr so foule a consequence from any doctrine as the Declamator hath from his own propriis perire pennis grave He could not have miscarried worse if I had hir'd him § 6. His 7th That I in my 24th page have tartly and sarcastically gibed against Calvin p. 14. Yet 1. I only name his words a horrible Decree not bestowing on him any one of those termes which my liberal Corrector bestowes on me in all the pages of his Book 2. Having spar'd his Person it was my Duty to shew his words and to observe their Inconvenience Why else are Books printed on either side Let the Reader be judge how I could have said less unless by losing my advantage which had been Treason to my Cause 3. Is it not strange that Mr. Barlee should reprove a man for being bitter How men do hate their own vices when they but fancy them in others which in themselves they love most dearly 4. How unsound are those words confess'd to be when he that doth faithfully repeat them is thought to gibe if I had not said the Truth he would have told me that I had Lied and yet because I said the whole Truth he calls me Giber § 8. His 8th that in my 70 page I give out Faith and Infidelity to be the causes of Election and Reprobation p. 15. Still my amazemen grows more and more that any man even in Print should speak so clearly against his knowledge and contradict his own Eyes and the Eyes of as many as ever have or shall read me For 1. there is not any such word in all that page which he citeth or in any other which he citeth not 2. In the page going before § 55. not many lines before the passage which Mr. B. citeth I had said expresly that our Election is not of works but of him that calleth that good works are required as a necessary condition though â—…erly unworthy to be the Cause of our Election 3. In the page which he citeth I say that Christ is the means the meritorious Cause and the head of our Election And that upon the condition of beleeving in his Son God gave the promise of eternal life from Joh. 3. 26. what I called the condition why doth he say I gave out to be the Cause if he knew no difference betwixt the cause and the condition why would he meddle in these affairs for which he is not qualified with any tolerable skill it is indeed for my Humiliation that I must be whipt by that man whom I must Teach to distinguish betwixt the Cause propter quam res est for which a thing is and the necessary condition sine quâ non est without which it is not I have no way to help him out in his great extremity and distress but by saying that such a condition is causa-sine-quâ non Yet that will do him but little service For Gods Commandments written or unwritten are not the Cause of sin and yet they are the Causa-sine-quâ-non without which it is impossible that there should be a Transgression My Declamator it seems cannot write a great book without Calumnies and railings but it follows not they are the Cause unless he will have them a material Cause of which his book is Composed as of a very essential part Suppose a man should say that without a Magistrate there can be no Rebellion who is therefore a condition without which it is impossible for any Rebellion to be committed can we affirme with any Truth that he gives out the Magistrate to be the Cause of the Rebellion if Mr. B. shall alleage that he knew the difference betwixt the Cause and Condition of our Election and needed none of my Teaching his case is worse then before and he confesseth it a studied or wilfull misdemeanour If he mislik't my words why did he not faithfully repeat them and shew the reason of his mislike But if he did not why would he proclaim that my page was innocent by shewing he needed to forge it guilty 4. If I had spoken that which he knows I did not I had not spoken no more then what Polanus himselfe hath yielded Who to the ninth Argument brought to prove that Faith is one of those Causes for which God decreed to make men safe he gives a willing concession and professeth to be of that opinion and reckon's it as a calumny to be said to speak otherwise So that Polanus an Anti-Remonstrant I am sure is more that which is call'd Arminian then Mr. T. P. or perhaps then Arminius himself Let Mr. B. contend against him 5. As if Mr. B. took care not to speak a true word he add's the word Reprobation for which he quotes the same page When first there is not any mention nor any the least occasion for it Secondly If I had said it elsewhere why did he not refer us to it Thirdly I had never so little Logick as to say that any thing in man which is the object could be the
Prosper who breathed nothing but S. Austin that almost all doe unanimously agree that God's Predestination was according to his fore-knowledge so as he made some vessels of honour and some of dishonour even for this cause because he foresaw their several ends of what wills they would be and what would be their Actions under the assistance and help of Grace Lastly the excellent Melancthon whom Mr. B. is so ambitious to have of his party hath hurt the Anti-Remonstrants as much as he was able by this one saying That all the Antient writers except one Austin did beleeve some Cause of Election to be in us had I said as much I should have heard of it with both Ears Had he not said some Cause which was more then I would ever have wished or desired he needed not have excepted Saint Austin neither Both because of that passage which I cited out of his Retractations and very many more to be produced and because he vindicated the Tenent of conditional Election in all the Fathers that went before him Upon all which it follows that when Mr. B. pretends either that Antiquity is for his opinions or that it is not for mine he doth before he is aware bestow his Correptory Correction upon Calvin Beza and Twise which are his own dear Authors and besides upon Austin Prosper and Melancthon whom he would make to be his own but is not able But 7. Suppose that Austin the Bishop had retracted those opinions of which he was being a Presbyter as Mr. Barlee betrayes an Ignorance to that effect p. 17. doth it follow that the last opinion a man takes must be the truest if so Mr. B. is quite undone For how many besides my inconsiderable selfe have been for absolute Decrees in their dayes of Ignorance and Childehood who growing to riper understandings and reading better books as well as conversing with better company and obtaining some Degree of manumission from Passions and prejudices have discerned those fallacies wherewith before they have been blinded Ph. Melancthon at first was of Luthers opinion in these points But growing in Wisdome and Grace he saw his Errour and persevered in his conversion unto the end So the late Primate of Armagh was though a late yet a serious convert And affirmed not long before his Death to several persons of great worth whom I can name that he utterly rejected all those opinions of Mr. Calvin Besides I may aske Will Mr. B. turne Montanist Photinian Apollinarian or Nestorian because Tertullian Photinus Apollinaris and Nestorius were very Orthodox in their yonger dayes when they writ their babelike things and fell at last into their several Errors when in respect of their age they should have been wisest shall their latest writings be called manlike meerly because they were their latest Yet men will thus reason who see but a little way before them Or 8. Suppose that Austin had said nothing in behalfe of that Doctrine which I assert but all against it whereas I can prove that if he speaks against me in any place he speaks it all against himselfe too and so his suffrage shall be due either to both or neither yet he will willingly give place to all his Teachers and Tutors which for foure hundred years together had shewed him the way in which it behoved him to walke It is as vain to urge Austin against conditional Decrees as Jerome the Presbyter against Bishops Who besides that he was but a single man and overheated by a Deacon is as little a friend to the Posterity of Aërius as any other of the Fathers If we may give credit not to the tacit but loud confessions of Blondel Salmasius Lud. Capellus and diverse others of their perswasions 9. The babelike writings of Austin are such as he pend next after his conversion Such as de Praed Sanct. and how liable Mr. B. himselfe is to his own Inditements any man may see by his citations § 18. His 18th That we so farr teach men to rely upon their own wills as that for Grace and Glory they are more beholding to them then Gods p. 34. This is so farr removed from truth that it did not lie in his power to drive it farther And since he hath fathered this Calumny upon noe page in my Notes I will do that for him I said in my p. 55. and 56. That no man can go to heaven any otherwise then by Christ nor to Christ unless it be given that is unless the Father draw him That God by glorifying doth crown his gifts and Graces in us Not acquir'd by us but infus'd by him That we cannot pant after the waters of life unless he gives us our very thirst That there is no good thought arising in us unless suggested by his preventing Grace no nor increased unless strengthened by his subsequent Grace 〈◊〉 no nor consummate unless perfected by his Grace of perseverance And in my p. 70. that there is no matter for man to boast on he having nothing which he hath not receaved no not so much as his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is God that makes the difference as well as God that chooseth c. I am troubled to recount what yet I must in my own Defence by what improbable immoderate and ridiculous falsifications he incurs the detestation of all good men and I am confident of his own party who cannot approve of such dealings in any imaginable Case T is plain that I am more then innocent as to this particular and that if any man is guilty it is himself in his p. 113. § 19. His 19th That upon he cannot tell what occult quality in the freewill I and my party do lean upon as a broken reed that we may be called nay chosen p. 34. This being neere of kin to the former needeth no more for its discovery then is there set down Yet because he referrs to my p. 69. I will have the patience to say a little As 1. That in all that page there is not one word towards it 2. That all in that page doth directly overthrow it 3. That there is an argument in that page § 55. which because Mr. B. can only raile at for being impossible for him to answer I wish the Author of the Preface would undertake for him 4. He doth implicitly confess he frames a slander by confessing he cannot tell what c. For if I had told him he might have told from me 5. He is himselfe more guilty of this charge in his p. 113. 6. he confesseth that S. Austin spake more like a Pelagian by ascribing a secret merit to the will then I can be any where found to doe And for so doing that Father is only called childe whereas if I had said occultissimum meritum as Austin did I had been a Heretick at least in the account of my Corrector § 20. His 20th That in my p. 70. I affect to be an
tenebrarum A man is often the efficent cause of his own blindnesse sicknesse Death it self which yet are privations of three contrary habits But 8. A thing may be privative in one respect and yet positive in an another As we find by experience in our sicknesses and sins The stone and the Srangury the Feaver and the Pestilence are not only privative of health and pleasure but they are constitutive of sicknesse and torment and destruction it self So adultery and murder and blasphemy and Witchcraft are not only the absences or meere privations of Grace and vertue but they do ponere multifariam constitute both the species and degrees of vice Murder hath some thing of positive in it by which it differs in kind from all other sins and in degree from other murders The disorder of Nature the confusion of faculties the resistance made against Grace the defacing of God's Image the grieving his Spirit the dihonouring his Name the like are such attendances of sin as do inforce it to be more then meerely privative If Davids sin of not protecting the life of Vriah and the chastity of his wife had had no more then a privative entity yet his murder of the first and his pollution of the Second could have no lesse then a positive entity If the sin of not admonishing or reproving the guilty were meerely privative yet the sin of seducing and perverting the innocent would have something in it to make it positive If the sin of not obeying the commandements of God did wholly consist in a deficiency yet would it have something of addition to rebell with violence against them We know by experience that there are some of whom we commonly say they are not good and rather not very vitious then very vertuous Whereas others are not only positively but superlatively evil So that according to M. B. one sin would be a privative o◠a negative privative and another Sinne would be a Positive Privative But 9. It cannot so much as be pretended that every sin is only privative For every privation praesupposeth a Habit. Which every sin cannot do Because a man may be covetous or cruel who never was liberall or compassionate Which rather implie's a Negation then a privation of those vertues which he hath not lost but never had So that if those vices have nothing in them of positive but do wholly consist in a Deficiency they will not be privative but negative of Entity that is to say they will be nothing 10. To conclude If there is any Truth in that Proposition That there is a deficient cause of sin it is in a morall signification quod qui peccat deficit à regulâ rectae rationis c. that the sinner is wanting or defective in the performance of his duty But then that will not be sufficient to verifie the other part of Mr. B. his assertion That sin hath no efficient cause Because that Agent that is morally deficient and in that circumstance faileth and transgresseth the Law doth yet effect or prodvce the action which is so deficient and so irregular For 1. the Adulterer is without question the efficient cause of his filthy act 2. The Divell is called by our Saviour the Father of lies and sure a Father is an efficient 3. A man by Gods grace is the efficient of a good action and as such rewardable And I hope Mr. B. will not say what is much worse then Pelagian that man is more the efficient of a good action then of an evill one For which he is punishable with much more justice then rewardable for the other To conclude Mr. B. himself is of opinion in his p. 111. where he thinks it for his turn that there may be something positive in a privation and that in death there is so so far forth as under the notion of punishment and so is from God the Author of it Let him now but remember First that sin is sometimes under the notion of a punishment next that death is a privation as much as any sin can be and more then some sins can possibly be Thirdly that he alleageth it as the reason in his p. 55. why they do not say that God is the Author of sin even because that sin hath no efficient cause And then he is forced to conclude in one of these sad inferences 1. Either that God is not the Author of Death consisting in a deficiency as well as sin at least Or 2. that he is the author of sin which hath something in it of positive as well as death at least Or 3. That he is the Author of both as farr as both have any thing of positive in them Or 4. That he is the Author of neither as being not efficient of what consisteth wholly in deficiency So miserably intangled is this man in his own unwary unskilfull sayings But I have not shew'd him his whole unhappinesse For whilst he argues their deniall of Gods being the Author of sin from sins not having any efficient cause p. 55. he perceives not that that Reason is as apt to evince that the sinner himself is not the Author of sin neither man nor Divell And then according to Mr. B. either sin hath no author at all as consisting wholly in a deficiency p. 55. or God is the Author of it as having something in it of positive p. 111. or that God its first Author as having decreed it from eternity saith Mr. B. p. 73. and man only the second as fulfilling in time what was decreed from Eternity p. 79. 135. From all which Absurdities which do naturally grow from his Principles and distinctions we must conclude by way of Refuge that it is not for a Small-thing a meere defect or privation much lesse for No-thing of which there is not a cause efficient that God doth punish wicked men in a bottomelesse lake of fire and Brimstone where the Recompence or Revenge is not only not finite but of eternall duration too 3. And now M. B. I hope hath learn't how by sin's having an efficient cause the Sinner becomes the cause Efficient of his eternall punishment Not of Hell the place of his punishment nor of the Divels or the Fire which are the Instruments of his punishment for they are substances of God's Creating and in genere substantiarum are very good And this was but the grosnesse of Mr. B. his mistake to deny that the Sinner is the Cause of his Damnation because he did not make Hell which is the place of Damnation So he askes if the Judges doe let the Malefactors be the efficients of their Gibbets Racks Rodds c. Forgetting that the Carpenter is the efficient of such as these which are the Instruments wherewith to punish not punishment it selfe Now that which I said was plainly this That God having ordained that such Causes as Sin should be productive of such effects as punishment and that Sin
not to mention yet would not confesse that his old friend had erred or spoken rashly I will a little consider the three particulars to which he speaks First he tells us that the Dr. doth put a wide difference betwixt Gods efficient and his efficacioâ—s will To which I reply 1. That the difference cannot be very wide betwixt two wills which are both irresistible and such are these two in the profession of Dr. Twisse Besides he will confesse that Gods will is efficient in the production of good and yet they both say that Gods decree is no lesse efficacious in the permission of evil then in the production of Good which is to equal efficient with efficacious But 2. Though there is indeed a difference betwixt efficient and efficacious yet Dr. Twisse and his Timothy make none at all whilest they say that Gods will doth tranâ—ire in rem permissam for that transience of the will into the object is not separable from efficiency as Dr. Twisse himself acknowledgeth when to make Predestination not to be ad alterum he affirmes it to be an immanent Action and yet he is willing to denie any such efficiency by onely acknowledging an efficacy in the permission of evil the former of which if Mr. B. will deny he will ruine his Cause as much as I can desire him and if he cannot understand it let him discover his infirmity before I indeavour to work his Cure But having spoken of this distinction Chap. 3. § 28. I refer my Reader thither and reply to his second Answer no more then this that Dr. Twisse speaks not onely of some judiciary acts of God upon impenitent sinners as Mr. B. pleads at a venture and discovers his adventure by the word doubtlesse which implyes onely a confidence and not a knowledge or if he did it were no good plea whilest he is for a transience of Gods will into the sin permitted and for the urging of occasions to smite the minde c. and therefore Hosea 3. 13 14. and 2 Thes 2. 3. do onely stand in his paper as the signal Monuments of his Impertinence or Abuse To his third I reply what I inlarged on before that what he saith no body can deny was not the thing which I mislik't considered simply in it self but that I might not set down scraps and bits of the Doctors words as now Mr. B. hath affirmed for want of Logick I transcribed those words to shew the full sense of that which follow'd But the things themselves which were precisely the objects of my dislike and to which I expected Mr. B. his Answer or Abâ—uration were the two foul speeches which I have pointed out with Digits at the beginning of this Section which because Mr. B. was afraid to meddle with I conceive he mislikt them as well as I. The Conclusion I Conclude with some Reasons why I will lose no more time in representing the other weaknesses of my Incomparable Antagonist but only leave them to be judged of by that accompt which I have hitherto given of his Abilities and Designes 1. I finde him so obnoxious in every Page and Period of his Attempts that should I vindicate my self after the measure that he is guilty I could not answer to my Discretion so great a wastfulnesse of Time nor to my Reader so great a length 2. It was the opinion of several persons that the best way of clearing the First Edition of my Notes would be to set forth a Second without addition or alteration And if that again were calumniated then to set forth a third At least not to be long in my Vindication of those Truths which Mr. B. hath injur'd but cannot hurt 3. The very Taste of some things is able to breed a Satiety if not a Surfet When some wagers have con-been laid cerning the Correptory Correction that let a Man dip where he will he shall not finde a clean Page they that have betted on this side have alwayes won Cut off the Nayles and the Hair and other excrescencies of the Thing I mean the scoldings inventions Et nusquam in toto corpore corpus erit the whole Body of his Book will be transparently thin and slender And I hold it not lawful or decent to combate with him at his own weapons 4. He commends his Answer to my two * Portals as he is pleas'd to word it viz. my Title Epistle Dedisatory and Paraenesis to the Reader to the serious perusal of such as are not at leisure to read him through Therein he professeth to have been * purposely the longer for the gratifying of some and to have taken off the edge of my Obâ—ections From whence I gather that he thinks it the shrewdest part of his Book And thence I concluded it the fittest subject of my Reply 5. Such as he takes to be the keenest and choisest passages of the following part of his Volnme he hath industriously premised in his Invective against my Portals And that he gives for the Reason why he will speak but briefly and by †strictctures to that which indeed is most material So that taking foâ— my Theme his first nine Sheets and fetching in his several strengths from other places of his Book to avoid abundance of Repetition I have extracted the very Quintessence of all his Correptory Correction 6. He hath happily confess'd that the Ten Speeches which I quoted in the entrance of my first Chapter do make one great * Pillar upon which all my Book doth rest Upon which it follows that if I have proved undeniably that that Pillar is not rotten nor overturn'd by him as he pretendeth but establisht rather and confirm'd as I have evidently shewed I need not display him any farther until he shall endeavour to shake that Pillar by invalidating the proofs by which that Pillar is supported For whilst it cannot but be granted that his Doctors and Doctrines do tempt the people to believe that God is the Author or cause of sin some in those very words and some to that very purpose and almost all in a language as bad or worse with what excuse or patience can such a writer be consider'd in all his failings 7. He hath made his whole work so immethodieal and confus'd and taken so many strange courses to make his Reader incapable of compaâ—ing his Declamation with the Notes which I had written on Gods Decrees which he in part doth acknowledge by his Apology to the Reader just before his Errata that he implicitly confeâ—seth he durst not stand to an easie trial And when I consider how many Men were imployed in the correction of every Sheet besides the ordinary Corrector and with how absolute a Liberty they were impowr'd I cannot but look on his Apology in the conclusion of his Book as the deepest Instance of his Invention 8. Whereas the only right way to confute my Notes had been either by proving that my Principles were false or that my Inferences from thence
9. 4. 5. t Prov. 1. 29. 31. Maâ— 25. 4â— Psal 81. 11. 12. Rom. 1. 21 24 25 26. Jer. 6. 19. 6. u Hooker Ecâ— Polit. l. 5. Sect. 72. ☞ The Reverend Bp. Hall saith the same in effect in his 34th Select Thought p. 103. 104. comparing a Reprobate to one that is a Felon of himselfe Bishop Davenant also is express that the Original and Cause of all Evils is not founded in God Reprobating but in the Reprobates themselves And that there is no such Decree of God by which Reprobates should be forced to Sin and Perish but alwayâ—s they Perish by their own voluntary Unbelief and Impiety Free and not Constrained Which how contrary it is to the common doctrine of Sub and Supralapsariâ—ns I shall shew by my Citations when I come to the 63 page of Mr. B. ☜ 7. w eo majore conâ—ilio Religione scribi debâ—bant quare majore curâ ac studio illa artis vestigia confector religionem fidem quam debemus rebus sacris praeâ—tare studui c. Melancth ad Hen. 8. ante loc Com. Edit 1536. x Causam Reprobâ—tionis certum est hanc esse viz. peccatum in hominibus humanam voluntatem paulâ— inferiùs Haec de causâ Rejectionis seu Reprobationis certa sunt Phil. Melancth in loco Praedestin p. 316. 317. Edit Basil 1562. Causa reprobationis in ipsis est p. 320. Correp Cor. p. 129 * Quam Lutheri sâ—ntentiam postea Philippus Melancton tum in Confessione tum in locis communibus correxit Cassand Consult de Praesci ad Art 19. page 134. †Confer Melanct loc Com. de Cau. Pec. p. 47. 48. cum Calvin Inst l. 3. c. 23. Sect. 4. p. 323. * Grotius observes that the Followers of Calvin were fierce and cruel but the Followers of Melancthon mild and gentle Vot pro Pace p. 18. y Nonne Melancthon damnavit Scholas publicas nune autem dicit maneant scholae quae bonae sunt vitia corrigantur Erasm in Epist l. 31. Ep. 59. p. 2127. Confess August Artic 18. 19. p. 22. 23 24. Cassander p. 128. usque ad p. 135. Grâ—t ad Cass p. 307. 308. 309. z These objective considerations are the proper Causes of his Temporal Transient acts and of the execution of those Decrees Correp Cor. p. 113. No man ever suffered to the cutting of his finger but for his Sin Which is not the Cause of Gods Decree but only of the Execution of his Decree page 116. a P. MolinaeiCausae Orthodoxae non tam defensio quà m praevaricatio Ut non modo hac ex parte Causam Arminianorum plus justo promoveret sed quicquid antea de electionâ— satis Orthodoxè differuerat prorsus convelleret Twiss in Vin. Gr. l. 1. par 1. Digr 1. Sect. 4. p. 58. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. * His words were in Latine verbatim thus communi Presbyterorum consilio 3. 4. of Dr. Twisse his â—â—arging of hâ—…ren tâ—… â—…apsarians with their making God the author of sin 1. 2. 1. ☜ a Vis liberâ— pronunâ—iem quod vnice proficiatur ex hac nostrae de praedestinatione sententiae temperatione dicam quid sentiam Hinc nimirum efficitur ut à lapsu primorum parentum decreto praedestinationis subjiciendo subordinando liberemur c. Twiss Vin Gra l. 1. part 1. p. 87. Digr 4. Sect. 4. c. 4. Edit 2. Amster 1632. b Sed quem alterâ viâ declinare satis anxie cupivimus ad eundem lapidem alterâ nihilo minus infeliciter impeâ—â—rimâ—s 〈…〉 c Quiâ—… mum anxia hac nostrâ scopuli istius declinatione profecerimus Id. ib. d Haec sunt monstra illa opinionum portenta quae nobis parturit paritista sententia Sublapsariorum sc scholis Jesuiticis Arminianis digniora quam nostris Id. ib. p. 88. Col. 1. e Objectum praedestinationis universae esse massam nonduÌ„ conditam nec tameÌ„ cujusquam Reprobationem fieri citra considerationem peccati probatur per totum cap. 5. l. 1. par 1. Sect. 4. Digr 3. p. 77. f Confer l. 1. par 1 Sect. 4. Digr 2. c. 1. p. 63. 64 65. cum cap 4. Digr 4. ejusdem libri Sectionis p. 87 88. g Quod posterior sententia Piscatoris sit deterior eâ quam retractat Id. l. 1. par 1. Sect. 4. Digr 3. cap. 2. p. 74 75. h quod videam Theologum istum in articulo Reprobationis turpiter hallâ—cinatum adeoque purum putum Arminianismum Ecclesiis Reformatis reposuisse Idque proh dolor nimium animosè splendide sine omni tergiversatione executum esse Quo facto hac ex parte non modo ex professo cum Arminianis conspirat sed Idem l. 1. part 1. Sect. 4. Digr 6. c. 1. p. 92. k Reprobatio non procedit quemadmodum ille contendit nist ex peccatis actualibus praevisis perseverantiâque finali in ijsdem Id. ibid. 2. Of Mr. Calvin's stile and Temper l Quâ—s nune quidam Augustini supra modum Admiratores Pelagio compares faciunt Grot in Discuss Riv Apol p. 98. conferantur illa verba cum Calvin Instit l. 2. c. 2. Sect. 4. â—ol 78. m Grot. vot pro Pace page 17. n Imo ob atrocia dicta Bucerus ei Nomen dedit Fratricidae Hanc maledicendi libidinem Calvinus in Epist ad Bucerum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Impatientiam vocaâ— nondum aiâ— consecutum ut Belluam domuerit Si quis post id ab eo scripta leget inveniet eum profecisse sed in pejus Id. ibid. p. 18. 3. o Vide â—â—iscopium in suo Vedel Râ—apsod cap. 10. p. 186. 187 188 190. seqq p Correp Cor. p. 28. q Correp Cor. p. 56. 4. 1. r Correp cor p 63. lin 12. 13 14. c. s Ibid. line 3 4. from the bottome t Id. ibid. lin 2. from the bottome u Had it been out of Calvin it must have been de occultâ dei Providentiâ Not in Serm. de Prov. c. ☜ ☞ 2. Calvin Inst. l. 1. c. 18. Sect. 4. p. 71. 3. w E. G. in his p. 134. Of Gods permission of sin How understood by Mr. B. and his Masters and how by me ☜ 3. * Of this see more ch 4. Sect. 28. x x Corrept Cor. p. 7â— 79. p. 54. 196. 5. y Correp Cor. p. 54. 69. z Id p. 55. 117 118. a Id. p. 58. where he refers to my Section of Gods permission Qui tollit providentiam tollit Deum b b b For all which and more see my Testimonies out of Calvin Zuinglius and Dr. Twisse in my 9 and 10 pages * Theodor. Bezâ— in lib. Quâ—st Resp Christianarum p. 695. †Calv. Inst l. 3. c. 23. Sect. 8. p. 325. Sect. 7. fol. 325. * Dr. Twiss in vind Gra. l. 1. part 1. Sect. 12. p. 140. See also Corr. Corr. p. 88. and what I have cited upon his 28 Invention c Apud Vos de Humano Arbitratu Divinitas pensitatur nisi homini deus