Palaestine I think it good to rehearse them first in Latine after in Englishe as they are gathered togither by Augustine And theÌ„ to shewe according to your request what parte of their doctrine which they teache vnder the name of Predestination my selfe and other doe mislyke To the ende that you and other may the better iudge who are in deede worthy to be called Pelagians and whether some parte of their doctrine be not for iust cause misliked Crowley Here Cerberus vseth all his Retorique at once to persuade his dearely beloued friend whose letter he sayth he aunswereth that he and other of his minde be falsely and wrongfully accused to be enimies of Gods holy predestinatioÌ„ c. And to this ende he will in as fewe words as possibly he can set forth what shamefull doctrine is now taught c. But first he will set forth both in Latine and in Englishe those errours which the olde Heritike Pelagius with other did holde and also reuoke c. That men may the better iudge who are in deede worthy the name of Pelagians for he thinketh that he hath proued that we against whom he writeth are those that should be called Pelagians and whether some parte of oure doctrine be not for iuste cause misliked Now let vs sée how he noteth Pelagius errours out of Augustine first in Latine and then in Englishe Which when we haue weighed we shall sée who are moste lyke Pelagius he his or I and mine For this is his purpose I am sure for that he toucheth me first by name and setteth himself and such as he is against al such as I am affirming that whereas we accuse them as enimies of Gods Predestination they are in déede y e most intire louers and we the enimies therof My chief labor therfore in this Apologie shall be to make the truth hereof to appeare playnely to all the indifferent hearers Cerberus The wordes of Austen are these Episto 106. tomo 2. Obiectum est enim eum dicere Quia Adam siue peccaret siue non peccaret moriturus esset 2. Et quod peccatum eius ipsum solum laeserit non genus humanum 3. Et quod infantes in illo statu sunt quo Adam suit ante praeuaricationem 4. Et quod neque per mortem vel praeuaricationem â—de omne genus humanum moriatur neque per resurrectionem Christi omne genus humanum resurgat 5. Et diuites baptizatos nisi omnibus abrenuntient si quid boni visi fuerint facere non reputari illis nec eos habere posse regnum Dei 6. Et gratiam Dei atque adiutorium non ad singulos actus dari sed in libero arbitrio esse vel in lege atque in doctrina 7. Et dei gratiam secundum merit a nostra dari 8. Et silios Dei non posse vocari nisi omnino absque peccato fuerint effecti 9. Et non esse liberum arbitrium si Dei indiget auxilio quoniam in propria voluntate habet vnusquisque facere aliquid vel non facere 10. Et victoriam nostram non ex Dei adiutorio esse sed ex libero arbitrio 11. Et quod poenitentibus veni a noÌ„ detur secuÌ„dum gratiam misericordiam Dei sed secundum moritum laborem eorum qui per poenitentiam digni suerint misericordia Haec omnia Pelagius anathematizauit The first of Pelagius errours which Augustine here citeth is that Adam shoulde haue died whether he had sinned or not sinned This is as you heare one of Pelagius wicked errours that sinne is not the cause of Reprobation or casting away death sprong out of Gods ordinance or some other way came not of mans sinne saith he whether man had sinned or not sinned yet should he haue dyed contrary to the manifest Scripture which sayeth that by one man sinne entred into the worlde death by the meanes of sinne Roma 5. b. And the wyse man sayth that God created maÌ„ to be vndestroyed And againe he saith God hath not made death neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the liuing he created al things that they might haue their being yea all the people of the earth hath he made that they shoulde haue health that there should be no destruction in them and that the Kingdome of Hell should not be vpon earth for righteousnesse is euerlasting and immortall but vnrighteousenesse bringeth death Wicked and abhominable therfore was this errour of Pelagius which affirmeth that whether man had sinned or not sinned he shoulde haue dyed And here in the very beginning of Pelagius errours I reporte me to themselues euen to themselues I saye that blowe the trumpet of defamation against other with the termes of pestilent Pelagians whether those whome they so accuse nowe to be Pelagians holde this errour or whether they themselues which woulde take some mote of errour out of other mens eyes haue not this Pelagius beame sticking fast in their owne let they themselues be iudges or let their owne doctrine iudge both in print and preaching whereof some parte shall be hereafter rehearsed Yea let all the worlde iudge which haue hearde the doctrine of both parties who they are that in this point ought worthily to be called Pelagians Crowley After Cerberus hath set downe in Latine certaine of Pelagius errors to y e number of .xi. he repeteth y e first in Englishe that is that Adam should haue dyed though he had not sinned And bycause his purpose is to proue that we are those that holde this Pelagian heresie he vnderstandeth Pelagius meaning to be that sinne was not the cause of Reprobation or casting away but that heath sprong out of Gods ordinaunce And so at the last he concludeth that Pelagius and we are all one in thys point for we teache the same doctrine What moued Pelagius to teache that doctrine I knowe not neyther did I at any time so much as once thinke to holde or desende it And I thinke I may be bolde to say in the name of all that haue written or preached the doctrine that Cerberus misliketh that not one eyther hath or will teache it Although Cerberus doe boast that hereafter some parte of our doctrine shall be shewed whereby all men may be able to iudge that we are al one with Pelagius in this point For mine owne parte I will put all men out of doubt that I beleue and haue doe and will if God permit wache that if Adam had not sinned he had neuer dyed And that God did create man to be vndestroyed And that God made not death as the wise man writeth But by one man sinne entred into the the worlde and by sinne death And I can not sée that any of my breathren haue or doe teache any otherwise either in writing or preaching Wherefore Cerberus doth vs open wrong to ioyne vs with Pelagius in thys errour As for the doctrine that I haue written and
altered at Gods pleasure as by examples we sée it hath As at the redde sea when the water stoode still on heapes like hilles and when at the word of Iosua the sunne stoode stil and moued not c. The fourth and last is that which al the businesse is about And Cerberus would faine make all men beleue that we make no difference betwéene this fourth and the first Of this necessitie doth Melancthon write thus Quartus gradus est mutabilium quae tamen vocantur necessaria necessitate consequentiae id est quae suns quidem re ipsa mutabilia sed nòn mutantur vel quia sic à Deo decreta sunt vel quia sequuÌ„tur ex causis quae nòn mutantur cum tamen mutari potuisseÌ„t vel quia cum suâ—t contradictoriae simul verae esse nòn possunt c. That is to saye The fourth degree of necessities is of those things which are mutable which are notwithstanding called necessarie by the necessitie of consequence That is to say which are in déede mutable but are not chaunged eyther for that they be so decréed of God or else for that they doe follow vpon causes that are not chaunged where as notwithstanding they might haue bene chaunged Or else for that when they be done the fiat contraries of them can not at the same time be true What haue I written against Shaxton more than this The thoughts the wordes and the déedes of men are of themselues mutable but as God hath decréed so shall it come to passe in all mens thoughts wordes and déedes It followeth therfore that though y e teachers of sects the muderers the theues and the drunkerds might haue withholden the consent of their willes from those wicked doings yet God hauing decréed to punish eyther them or others by that meane the thing must fal out according to that decree and yet God remayne iust and mans wil vnconstrained as I haue before sufficiently declared As touching the Text of Austen that Cerberus citeth out of his booke De Predestinatione Dei Cap. 2. I will first note what Erasmus and the rest of the learned sort doe thinke of that booke Hoc opusculum de Praedestinatione Dei noÌ„ esse Augustini vel ipsa breuitas arguit Deinde hoc docot quod Augustinus fortiter refellit praedestinationem esse ex operibus nostris Videtur fragmeÌ„tum alicuius libri cuius studiosus quispiam prooemium clausulam attexuit That is to say This little worke of the predestination of God is by the verie shortnesse thereof shewed not to be of Austens writing Moreouer it doth teach that predestinatioÌ„ is of our workes which thing Austen doth mightely refell It séemeth to be a scrap of some booke wherevnto some man beyng desirous therof hath fastened a proeme and conclusion Here thou mayst sée gentle Reader of what authoritie this booke is that Cerberus maketh so much of I wil not therfore spend any time in aunswering these words Cerberus Many things do offer themselues in this matter to be spoken but my purpose of briefnesse causeth me to growe to an ende I haue thought good therefore in few wordes to note one point more of euill doctrine which now a dayes is taught and it springeth also out of this foresaid proposition that Gods predestination causeth all sinne and wickednesse this it is that sinne is not the cause of Reprobation nor of Gods hatred towardes the wicked which are damned which thing in deede to be short I graunt must needes follow if the former conclusioÌ„ be true that sinne commeth of Gods predestination or that Gods predestination was the cause of Adams fall which was the originall of sinne For if sinne or the orignall thereof came of God or of hys ordinance and from God commeth nothing but that which is holie iust and good then is sinne no sinne and cannot be the cause of Gods hatred towardes them that perish except we should saye that God hateth them for that thing which is holie iust and good And least I should be thought through pretence of breuitie to passe ouer wythout plaine proufe of that which I say that thys part of doctrine is also set forth and taught I will rehearse one sentence of theirs published in print which is so open and manifest that it may serue as well as a thousand I read in the forenamed booke translated out of French into English toward the latter end of the booke vppon this place thus noted in figures and these verie words follow Rom. 9. c. 11. 12. 13. He sayth not onely that Esau was ordeyned to be hated before he did any euil for in so saying he should not seeme to exclude any thing but an actual sinne incredulitie But he saith expressely before he was borne whereby he excludeth originall sinne and all that whych might be considered in the person of Esau by hys byrth from the cause of hate Touching the Text whervpon it is spoken assuredly Inke serueth not worsse to make Iuorie white than these words to open the minde and sence of the Apostle as it were easy to proue if shortnesse would suffer to make a digression but touching that parte of doctrine thou feest that he speaketh of two opinions the one that actual sinne or incredulitie should be the cause of Gods hatred toward the wycked The other that originall sinne is the cause of Gods hate toward them Thys man agaynst them both taketh occasion vpon thys exaÌ„ple of Esau to exclude all that is in man eyther outward sinne or inwarde eyther originall sinne or actuall from the cause of Gods hate so that if it be true which they say God doth hate men neyther for their outward wicked life nor for their inwarde diuelish luste but for hys owne pleasure onely Crowley The purpose to be briefe causeth Cerberus to cut of many things that offer themselues to be spoken Yet for all the hast he must néedes note one poynt more of euill doctrine Which is that sinne is not the cause of Reprobation c. I would faine know how Cerberus could aunswere this Argument All causes are in order before their effectes but sinne was not before Reprobation Ergo sinne could not be the cause thereof Cerberus will denie the minor For he holdeth that sinne was before ReprobatioÌ„ The minor therefore must be proued thus Whatsoeuer was before Reprobation is eternall but sinne is not eternall Ergo sinne was not before Reprobation If Cerberus wil doubt of y â— maior it shal be proued thus Whatsoeuer was before ElectioÌ„ is eternall but Election and ReprobatioÌ„ are of like antiquitie Ergo whatsoeuer was before reprobation is eternall The maior is manifest by the wordes of S. Paul to the Ephesians Cap. 1. Sicut elegit nos in ipso ante mundi constitutionem As he elected vs in him before the worlde was made And if Cerberus wyll doubt of the minor as perhaps he will then let him shew vs how there can be a choyse
is the cause of Gods hate or eternal death and put the same into the one side of the ballaunce then take and put into the other side this saying of S. Paul to the Romanes was that then that was good made death vnto me God forbid but sinne was made death vnto me Then wey both these sayings together with the hand of good aduisemēt in the indifferent ballāce of vpright iudgement and put not in aboue three graynes of wilful partialitie thus shalt thou plainly see that the Apostle agreeth farre better with the Maiestie of God and hath a much more reuerent opinion of hys iudgements than these men haue yea thou shalt easily perceyue whatsoeuer they say that neyther Gods pleasure nor Gods ordinance or predestinatiō nor none other thing that is good is made death or the cause of Gods hatred agaynst any man but sinne is the very grounded cause why God hateth taketh vengeaunce and punisheth man by death and destruction according to that which the same Apostle sayth Death is the reward of sinne And the wordes of O see are also manifest plaine where he saith O Israell thou doest destroy thy selfe but in me onely is thy helpe In which words of the holie ghost thou seest how manifestly God doth as it were purge him selfe from being the cause or worker of mans destruction so that the perdition and destruction of man is altogether to be attributed vnto hym selfe And God being cleare neyther accessarie nor partaker thereof as the chiefe and hygh Iudge of heauen and earth vnspotted and wythout blame gyueth the sentence of euerlasting death vpon man for his own wicked deseruing and offence But on the other side sayth God vnto man in me only is thy helpe In God onely onely in God is our helpe and saluation in him onely and of him altogether and not of our selues commeth our saluation and all whatsoeuer belongeth therevnto The same is also set forth by all those Scriptures whych are before rehearsed to proue that sinne and euill commeth not of Gods predestination for vpon that conclusion dependeth also thys proposition that sinne is not the cause of Reprobation or of Gods hatred towards man Crowley Yet once againe hath Cerberus a snatch at Knoxe Whether he do report his words truly or not I knowe not for I haue not seene that booke of his neither haue I cause to thinke y t al is Gospel that Cerberus saith Much more adoe than néedeth doth Cerberus make to proue that an Argument à contrarijs simile and dissimile doth not alwayes conclude necessarilie For as he sayth who séeth not that they do not holde in all pointes This therfore that Cerberus hath here written is but dalliaunce and as it were dauncing about the bushe The questiō is whether the sequele be good in the matter that Knoxe doth vse it in or not We must therfore consider the matter and how Knoxe doth applie this maner of reasoning to this matter The matter therfore is a question moued concerning the cause why Esau shoulde be hated of God and Iacob beloued before any of them had done eyther good or euill yea and before they were borne and therfore before there could be in them any deseruing at all Now Knoxe sayth that if Esau were hated for his euill deseruing then must it néedes follow by an Argument following of the nature of contraries that Iacob was beloued for his well deseruing Nowe I must thinke well of Knoxe for I knowe hym to be not only learned but also godlie and therefore not like to ouershoote himselfe so farre that he woulde stretch an Argument taken out of the place of contraries further than the nature thereof will suffer I must thinke therfore that he meant that if God do in choosing and refusing in louing and hating respect nothing but the well deseruing of one sort and the euill deseruing of y e other as the common opinion of the Papistes is then it must néedes follow by an Argument of the nature of contraries that if he hated Esau for his euill deseruing he must needes loue Iacob for his well deseruing If Cerberus be not satisfied with this let him looke for furder aunswere at Knoxes owne hand for he is yet liuing and able to aunswere for himselfe As for the similitude of a King or Prince that Cerberus vseth to deface Knoxes Argument withall may serue him among such as know not that God is frée frō al mens affections and that he can not be moued to loue vs the better for the giftes that we bestow vpon him nor the worsse for that we take from him and spoyle him of any treasure that he ought to haue The nature of God is not to hate but to loue For S. Iohn sayth God is loue And as the wise man sayth he loueth all things that be and he hateth none of the thinges that he hath made Neyther hath he ordeined or made any thing hating the same that he ordeyned or made For in that he made or ordeyned them they are all excéeding good Wherefore when we say or when it is sayd in the Scriptures that God doth hate any of his creatures as it is said that he hated Esau it is meāt that he loued not Esau or those other creatures whome he is sayde to hate so well as he loued the others of whome it is sayd that he loued them It can not be denied but must néedes be confessed that God loued al his creatures in that he would make them some thing where as before they were nothing and in that he would giue them some part of that which is proper to himselfe For to be is proper to God And whatsoeuer hath any being it hath the same of God When God giueth a being to his creatures he sheweth that he loueth them but when he giueth them an euerlasting and blessed being then he loueth them so that the other loue in comparison of that seemeth but an hatred And therfore it is sayd that he hateth them whom he appointeth not to that euerlasting blessed being but leaueth thē to themselues that in them he may haue occasion to exercise his iustice and by them to gyue occasion to hys dearlie beloued to sée and consider the excéeding greatnesse of his loue and mercie towardes them But Cerberus séemeth to haue the whole Scripture on his side For he sayth that all the Scripture teacheth vs that God neuer hateth and punisheth vs without our owne deseruing Which saying I graunt to be true but not in that sense that Cerberus would haue vs to vnderstande it For Cerberus woulde haue vs to thinke that God could not be compted iust if he shoulde refuse any man in whome there were not sinne that might moue God to refuse him and to that ende he citeth the wordes of the wise man For this is his opinion as it appeareth before that in Christ all mankinde is elected and so consequently that Esau was elected in Christ But
the ballaunce against S. Paules wordes to the Romaines I leaue to himselfe to be weyed wyth the hand of good aduisement c. And let him put in as many graines of wilfull partialitie as he will for the saying is none of ours For we teach that sinne is the cause of eternall death in those that be not Gods elect and were it not that Christ hath washed his chosen slocke in his owne heart bloud sinne would be theyr destruction too It is but for his owne pleasure therfore that Cerberus doth thus turne round after his owne tayle Cerberus And vpon the same Article dependeth also an other part of doctrine which they teach worthy to be misliked of all men as wel for that it importeth a sophisticall search of bottomlesse secretes in the verie essence and nature of God as also for that it clearely withdraweth vs from Christ the only staie and comfort of our weake conscience deliuered vnto vs in the word of God for that they might be sure to holde fast the former principle that all things come of Gods predestination as running streames out of a deepe fountaine They affirme that the free mercie of God in Christ is but an inferiour cause of Election and that we are taught to ascende vnto a higher cause as vnto the eternall purpose and predestination of God which he determined onely in himselfe So sayth the printed booke before named translated out of French into English That same thing we reade also lately set forth in English print in the glose of the last trāslated Bible Rom. cap. 9. wyth these wordes As the only wyl and purpose of God is the chiefe cause of Election and Reprobation so his free mercie in Christ is an inferiour cause of saluation c. But for my part I trust in minde neuer to ascēd vnto that high cause of Election and in heart neuer to taste of that eternall purpose or predestination which God hath determined only in himselfe without or aboue his free mercie which is in Christ For surelie that eternall purpose whych cometh not of Gods free mercie in Christ is to destroy and not to saue Agayne if that eternall purpose spring out of Gods free mercie then is that free mercie of God the chiefe cause and not an inferiour cause why he purposeth to saue vs for a great dishonor it were to the mercie of God to be put to an inferiour place touching election and saluation of man For if euer Gods mercie be aboue all it is in the sauing of miserable man and mercie there is not in God towarde man but onely in Christ Therefore S. Paule Ephes 3. b. calleth it the eternall purpose which he purposed in Christ Iesus our Lord In Christ therefore was this eternall purpose and for hys onely sake God the Father eternally purposed to elect and saue vs. Consider and marke it well whence commeth thys purpose or wyll of God to saue vs but of his free mercie If hys purpose to saue vs spring out of his free mercie why is then his mercie inferior to his purpose or how is the fountaine inferior to the springs that come therof Also what may be sayd in God at any time or in any respect to be higher or greater than his mercie seeing it is written that his mercie is as great as him selfe Ecclesiast 2. d. Yea and most specially it is so to be sayd that his mercie passeth all when we speak of this matter For of thys it is written that mercie reioyceth agaynst iudgement and why all the iudgementes of God in thys behalfe are not to be compared vnto hys mercie for though it were not true whych Dauid sayeth that his mercie is aboue all his workes yet were it cleare that in Election and Redemption and saluation of man Gods mercie in Christ hath euer the highest place and those which in the saluation of our soules make the free mercie of God an inferiour cause how base a roume will they assigne vnto hys free mercie in nourishing and preseruing our bodies Let them reach as hygh as they can I trust to go no furder but to hold me fast by the euerlasting mercie of God and by the hemme of Christes garment for the Scripture describeth God vnto me wythout Christ as a wrathfull and moste terrible Iudge but in Christ and for hys sake as a father whose wrath is pacified and he well pleased reconciled agreed and at one and to speak of a hygher cause or purpose to elect and saue only in God beside or without this free mercie in Christ or that Christ and Gods free mercie in hym is not the chiefest cause which worked and obteyneth the decree and purpose of God to elect and saue it is plainely nothing else but to deny the mercy of God in election reconciliation redemption and saluation by Christ in Christ and for Christ As easily it may be perceyued if a man do but weigh and consider what eternall purpose an Election and a reconciliation is seing Christ is our Aduocate Mediator Peace Reconciliation Atonement as in these Scriptures following and many other it doth plainly appeare Psal 84. a. Math. 1. a. Ephe. 1. a. 2. b. Rom 5. a. b. Coloss 1. c. 2. Corin. 5 d. 1. Ioā 2. a. Heb. 5. b. c. and. 7. a. b. c. d. e. 2. Timoth. 1. c. And although it be true according to the Scriptures that God so loued the worlde that he gaue his onely begottē sonne c. yet did he neither loue the world nor gyue hys sonne wythout the intercession mediatiō of his sonne for if God loued the world without the reconciliation and mediatiō or before he was reconciled intreated and pacified by Christ then is Christ in vaine come to late to be our mediatour seing God the Father is without him alredy reconciled But horrible false is thys opinion For like as the sonne of a King might entreat his Father for the seruant whom for hys offences the King in hys displeasure were ready to cast not onely out of hys seruice but also into perpetuall prison euen so Christ our onely Sauiour and Gods only sonne did offer vp himselfe as a raunsome vnto his Father for vs whereby he pacified the wrath of hys Father and adioyned vs with himselfe to be sonne and heyres of hys Fathers glorie And this hath Christ done not only now in tyme but also euerlastingly in the most hygh and eternall purpose of God before the foundation of the world was layde Thus I end thinking it sufficient for this presēt that I haue in these few wordes pourged my selfe of those thīgs which you lay to my charge set forth vnto your iudgement the errors of Pelagius that you may the better diseerne who they are whych are worthie to be called after that sect and also plainly declared in what pointes my conscience differeth from certayne teachers of our time and vpon what groūd I am moued so to misslike some part of
name of Austen odious to the Christian reader as it semeth that Cerberus would make the names of both those men of God Marke therfore gentle reader what might cause Austen some thing to swarue from the truth in thys article He had to do with suche a one as denied Infantes to be spotted with Adams sinne and that therfore they neded no regeneration and so consequently no sacrament of regeneration The abhomination of this errour caused Austen to flye so far on the other side that he had not such a consideration of the promise of God as he shoulde haue had And so affirmed more than once that al that die with out baptisme must nedes be damned Let vs be contented that God hath by this errour shewed Saint Austen to bée a man And let vs giue him thankes for the abundaunce of good doctrine that this man hath lefte in writing not doubting but that that mercifull Lorde whom he serued woulde not suffer him to ende his life in that errour no more than he dyd in the Manicheis heresie which he did sometime stoutly defende althoughe it haue not pleased him to suffer it to appeare in writing that euer he did acknowledge it to be an errour As touching the opinion that Caluin and we Gospellers do holde concerning Infantes that die withoute baptisme it differeth something from Austen but more from Pelagius Yea we doe as muche abhorre the errour of Pelagius as Austen did For we affirme and are able by the Scriptures to proue that al Adams natural children are deade throughe Adams sinne and that none of them can be quickened and reuiued againe otherwise than by Christ And that so many as are not giuen vnto Christ do stil remain in that sinne and cannot be saued So far off are we from this Pelagian heresie Nowe that it maye appeare howe wée differ from S. Austen I will cite some matter out of the woorkes of maister Iohn Caluin Not as Cerberus doth to set him directly against Austen but to shewe how God hath reuealed vnto hys seruant Iohn Caluin that secret that he had not reuealed vnto his seruant Austen so fully so far forth as we can finde written in his bookes First we reade in the booke of maister Iohn Caluins Institutions in the title of Pedobaptisme or baptising of Chyldren these words folowing Sed omissis cauillis tenenda simplex est interpretatio quam attuli neminem donec renouatus fucrit aqua viua hoc est spiritu posse ingredi in Regnum Dei Iam est ex eo explodendum esse eorum commentum palam est qui omnes non baptizatos aeternae morti adiudicant That is But all subtilties set a side the simple interpretacioÌ„ that I haue made must be holden that is that none can enter into the kingdome of God til he be renewed by liuelye water that is the holy ghost Now therfore euen hereof it is manifest that the false opinion or fantasie of them that condemne to eternall death all that be not baptised is to be dryuen out with hissing and clapping of handes Againe the same Caluin sayth in his Comment vpon the sift Chapter to the Romaines Vt misera peccato haereditate potiaris satis est esse hominem residet enim in carne sanguine Vt Christi iustitia fruaris sidelem esse necessarium est quia side acquiritur eius consortium Infantibus peculiari ratione communicatur Habent enim in soedere ius adoptionis quo in Chrissti communionem coâ—ptantur De piorum liberis loquor ad quos promissio gratiae dirigitur Nam alij à communi sorte nequaquam eximuntur That is To enioy the miserable enheritaunce of sinne it is enough to be a man for if dwelleth in flesh and bloud But to enioy the righteousnesse of Christ it is required of necessitie that a man be faithfull for the company or felowship of Christ is obtained by saith To Infants it is after a certaine peculiar maner coÌ„municated For they haue in the couenaunt the right of adoption wherby they are adopted into the communion of Christ I speake of the children of the godly vnto whom the promise of mercye is directed For others are not deliuered from that lot that is common to all men By these wordes of Caluin it appeareth how we differ from Augustine for we are of one minde with Caluin who denieth not that the children of the vnfaithfull that dye without baptisme do remaine in the same state that the sinne of the firste man brought all mankinde vnto We differ therfore only in that we affirme that the children of the godlye doe appertaine to the couenant of God and therefore do not perishe though they be preuented by death Whether Austen continued to the ende in that minde that he sheweth him selfe in certaine of hys writings concerning this matter it is vncertaine for in his Retractations there is no mention therof But if he did this onely is the difference betwixt him vs that we ascribe that to the couenaÌ„t promise and election of God that he ascribeth to y e sacraments And as it appeareth in his 3. booke of questions vpon the olde Testament he him selfe teacheth the same doctrine that we doe His wordes be these in the. 84. Question Proinde colligitur inuisibilem sanctificatimem quibusdam adfuisse atque profuisse sine visibilibus sacramentis quae pro temporum diuersitate mutata sunt vt alia tunc fuerint alia medo sint Visibilem vero sanctificationem quae fieret per visibilia sacramenta sine ista iuuisibili posse adesse non posse prodesse Nec tamen ideo sacramentum contemnendum est nam contemptor eius inuisibiliter sanctificari nullo modo potest Hinc est quod Cornelius c. That is to say We do therfore gather that certaine men haue had the inuisible sanctification and haue bene benefited therby without the visible Sacramentes which are according to the diuersitie of the tune chaunged so that then they were of one sort and nowe of another And that the visible sanctification which should be wrought by the visible sacramentes maye be present without this that is inuisible but can not be profitable wythout it And yet is not the sacrament therfore to be contemned for he that contemneth it can by no meanes be made holy inuisibly Hereof it came that Cornelius and those that were wyth him when they were perceyued to be inuisiblye sanctified by the holye Ghost that was poured into them were notwithstanding baptised c. These words of S. Austen do plainly declare of what minde he was when he wrate these questions And thys booke of questions with the reast he hath retracted and perused againe allowing this sentence of his therin as it appeareth in the. 55. chapter of his second boke of Retractations Cerberus had no cause therfore to set Iohn Caluin against Austen for we take that to be vndoubtedlye the doctrine of Austen which we finde in his
Retractations and not reuoked But Cerberus purpose was craftily to cause all that would harken vnto him to estéeme both Caluin vs as most arrogant heretikes that wyll not sticke to compare one of our time with that auncient Father and to accept his iudgement without either reason or learning directly against the iudgement of him whom al the Church of Christ hath these many hundred yeres worthily reuerenced For who séeth not that Cerberus can not be one of those Gospellers that do accompt Caluin to be fully sufficient in auctoritie to encounter with Austen sith he writeth so bitterly against all thē that eyther write or preach that that Caluin hath in writing most euidently proued and defended Yea he alleageth Austen against Caluins doctrine and woulde seme thereby to triumphe ouer him and all that be of his minde As for the place that he cyteth out of Caluin I leaue for Cerberus to seke out at his leysure and when he hath founde it to note where it may be sound◠But I beleue it will be harde for him to find in Caluines workes that sentence in those wordes Cerberus There remaineth then as before I promised briefly to note those thyngs which I thinke worthye to be reproued about the doctrine of Predestination as it is now a dayes taught of many Wherin least I should seme to speake without assured grounde and bicause wordes in preaching in talke or disputation wherof I haue heard great abundance in thys matter may rashly passe with small aduisement and eyther easely be denied or soone forgotten I am determined to touch nothyng but their very wordes whych are set forth in Print And bicause the taking and aunsweryng of their whole bookes were a matter long and tedious being commonlye stuffed on the one side wyth an heape of opprobrious and outragious wordes against such priuate persons as they take in hand to write agaynst and on the other side filled rather wyth obscure subtelties than wyth plaine affirmations I haue thought it best therfore to take certayne sentences whych contayne manifest affirmatiōs out of diuers late printed Englyshe bookes wherein the summe and effect of this doctrine which manye doe for iust cause mislike is fully plainelye and simplye declared Crowley Nowe Cerberus beginneth to growe to the performance of his promise in noting those things in the doctrine of predestinatiō now preached as seme to him mete to be reproued And by the way he will not taunt vs but thus he sayth that in preaching talking and reasoning wordes may passe vs rashly and with small aduisement and be either easely denied or sone forgotten Wherfore he will touche nothing but that which we haue written and set forth in Print Well contented but yet I would Cerberus should knowe that we neither preache talke nor dispute with such rashnesse or small aduisement but that we are able and will by Gods helpe stande to all that we haue spoken therein and he is able to charge vs withall As for the outragious wordes that we vse towardes them that we write against shalbe found modest inough when they shalbe compared with the words that in this hys aunswere he vseth towards vs. Let him therfore procede in noting those things that he misliketh Cerberus I reade in an Englyshe booke set forth by Robert Crowley and entituled the confutation of .xiii. Articles c. these wordes Adam therfore beyng so perfect a creature that there was in him no lust to sinne and yet so weake that of himselfe he was not able to withstand the assault of the subtile serpent no remedye the onely cause of his fall must nedes be the predestination of God Thou seest dearly beloued in the conclusion of this sentence one point declared wherin the controuersie doth consist For where he plainlye affirmeth that Gods predestination is the only cause of Adams fall which is the sountayne of all sinne other hauing a much more reuerend opinion of God and of hys holye predestination do set their fote or rather their heart and soule agaynst their sayd conclusion Estemyng it far better to be torne in manye thousande pieces than to thynke or say that Gods fore-ordinance or predestination is the cause of any sinne or euil I besech thee let not thine eies be blinded or thy minde musfled wyth malice eyther agaynst the one partie or the other but in the ballāce of vpright iudgement waye the difference The one sayth as in this conclusion manifestlye appeareth and as afterwarde yet more plainly he affirmeth that the predestination of God is the onelye cause of Adams sinne and so consequently of all euill The other affirmeth directly contrary That God or his predestination is the cause of no sinne or euyll but the only cause of all goodnesse and vertue And herewyth agreeth the holye and diuine Apostle Sainct Iohn in hys Epistle saying All that is in the worlde as the concupiscence of the fleshe the lust of the eyes and the pride of life is not of the Father Al good things that are in the worlde are no doubt of God our heauenly Father but whatsoeuer in the worlde is concupiscence lust sinne euill or wickednesse the same is not of God our heauenlye Father S. Iohn doeth piainly and precisely affirme The lyke playnenesse vseth also the holye man Iesus the sonne of Sirach in these wordes Say not thou it is the Lordes fault that I am gone by for thou shalt not doe the thing that God hateth saye not thou he hath caused me to go wrong for he hath no neede of the vngodlye The verye same thing is plainely declared in these Scriptures folowyng and in other places almost innumerable Psal 5. Pro. 19. Ieremie 7. 19. Oseae 13. Iob. 34. 36. Rom. 7. 1. Corin. 14. Iacob 1. Exod. 34. Deut. 5. 2. Reg. 14. Psal 81. 144. Prou. 1. Sap. 1. 2 11. 12. 15. Eccles 2. 18. Esay 5. 30. 55. 65. Lament Iere. 3 Ezech. 18. 24. 33. Ioel. 2. 4. Esdr 1. 2. 7. 8. Math. 23. Act. 17. 1. Timoth. 2. 4. 2. Pet. 3. The same sayth Austen also plainely in these wordes Non ergo casus ruentium nee malignitatem iniquorū neque cupiditates peccantium praedestinatio Dei aut exitauit aut suasit aut impulit sed plane praedestinauit iudicium suuin quo vnicuique retributurus est pro vt gessit siue bonum siue malum quod Iudicium futurum non esset si homines Dei voluntate peccarent Neither the falles of them that fall nor the wickednesse of them that be wicked nor the luste of them that offende hath the predestination of God eyther prouoked moued or compelled but without doubt he hathe forcordeyned his iudgement wherby he will recompence euerye man according as he hath done whether it be good or euyll the whiche shoulde be no iudgement if men did sinne by the will of God Crowley I do acknowledge that this English booke that Cerberus saith he hath read was of
my writing I acknowledge also that Cerberus hath cited the wordes truely euen as I wrate them But that I ment by them as Cerberus doth conclude vpon them I vtterly deny For he concludeth that I haue affirmed that Gods predestination is the onely cause of all euill Whiche I neuer ment to teache neither do my wordes duely considered giue any occasion of such conclusion I graunt my words might haue bene more explaned and my meaning set forth more at large and all occasions of suche calumniations cut off if I had sene that before I wrate that booke whiche I thanke my Lord God I haue sene since Wherfore I minde by the help of God to do that now y e I was not so well able to do then that the Reader may perceiue that I haue with Austen profited in writing My words that Cerberus citeth are these Adam therefore being so perfect a creature that there was in him no lust to sinne and yet so weak that of him selfe he was not able to withstande the assault of the subtile serpent no remedie the only cause of his fall must nedes be the predestination of God Cerberus findeth no fault with any of these wordes till he commeth to no remedy And then no remedy I must be condemned as one that affirmeth Gods Predestination to be the onelye cause of Adams sinne and so consequentlye of all sinne But I haue not saide that Gods predestination was the onelye cause or anye cause of Adams sinne My wordes be that Gods Predestination is the onelye cause of Adams fall Nowe Cerberus can not sée howe Adams fall may be good and therefore he sayeth that it is the fountaine of all sinne and that to be the cause of that fall is to be the cause of all sinne But suche as haue eyes to sée do sée that as Gods predestination is the cause of Adams fall so Adams fall is good For it is the meane whereby God hath shut vp all vnder vnbeliefe that he might haue mercye on all And the meane whereby the Scripture shutteth vp all vnder sinne that the promise which is of the faith of Iesus Christ might be giuen to the faithfull I write therefore now as I wrate before in my Consutation of Shaxtons Articles that for asmuch as there was in Adam nothing to moue him to sinne for lust to do contrarie to Gods wil was not yet entred into him Sathan the enimy had no power then neither hath anye power yet ouer anye creature of God further than God doth limit and appoint him it must nedes followe that the only cause that Adam was assaulted ouerthrowen by Satan was the predestination of God which is euer all one with his vnsearcheable will counsel The fall of Adam thus considered neyther is nor can be counted sinne for it is the performance of Gods purpose whiche is euer good although vnsearchable by mans feble vnderstanding And yet I do not denie Adams fall to be sinno in Adam himself for it was Factum cōtramandatum Dei A dede done contrary to the commasidentent of God And so it had a cause in Adam himselfe which was the power of his wil whereby he consented to y e enticement of Satan who vsed the woman as his instrument therin Of thys will and the power therof Sainct Austen writeth thus De libero arbitrio lib. 3. Cap. 18. Cum autem de libera voluntate rectè faciendi loqui 〈…〉 de illa silicet in qua homo factus est loquimur When we speak of the will that is frée to do wel we speake of that will wherein man was made And againe in his booke De natura gratia Cepite 43. speaking of man he saith Quis enim eum nescit sanum inculpabilem factum libero arbitrio atque ad iustè viuendum libera potestate constitutum Who knoweth not that man was made found vnblameable and that he was ordeined with frée choyse and frée power or libertie to liue righteously And againe in his boke De Correptione gratia Cap. 11. Istam gratiam non habuit homo primus qua nunquam vellet esse malus sed sanè habuit in qua si permanere vellet nunquam malus esset sine qua etià m cum libero arbitrio bonus esse non posset sed eam tamenper liberum arbitrium deserere posset Nec ipsum ergo Deus esse voluit sine sua gratia quē reliquit in suo libero arbitrio quoniam liberum arbitrium ad malum sufficit ad bonum autem nihil est nisi adiuuetur ab omnipotenti bono quod adiutorium si homo ille per liberum non deseruisset arbitrium semperesset bonus sed deseruit desertus est Tale quippe erat adiutorium quod desereret cum vellet in quo permancret si vellet non quo sieret vt vellet The firste man had not thys grace whereby he shoulde neuer be willing to be euill but yet he had that grace whereby he might haue bene alwayes preserued from euill if he would haue continued therin and without which also he coulde not by frée will be good but yet he was able by frée wil to forsake it God therfore would not haue him to be without his grace whō he had left in his owne fréewill For fréewil is able inough to do euil but to do good it hath no power at al except it be holyē by the almightie goodnesse which helpe if that man had not by fréewill forsaken he shoulde haue bene good for euer but he did forsake and was forsaken For the helpe was such that he might forsake it when he woulde and suche wherin he might remaine if he woulde not such whereby it might come to passe that he should be willing By these places of S. Austen we maye see of what minde he was concerning the frée will of man before his fall It was suche that hée mighte consent to what hée woulde But the grace to be willing to consent to nothing but that which was good was not giuen vnto mā that man might haue experience of the power of his own will and so for euer after ascribe al the glory to him that worketh all in all The cause of Adams fall therfore euen by the iudgement of S. Austen of whome Cerberus maketh suche boast was not in himself For God had fore appoynted that by that meanes man should haue experience of hymselfe and so learne to trust in one stronger than hymself But the cause that made his fall sinne was in himselfe For he did willinglye consent to the perswasion of his wife who also had in like maner consented to the persuasion of the Serpent If Cerberus could consider the fall of the first man after this sort he would neuer conclude that I teaching that the Predestination of God was the onelye cause of mans fall shoulde withall conclude that it is the onlye cause of all sinne and euill For I do
not teache that it is the cause of any euill or sinne at all In vaine therfore doeth Cerberus make his Antitesis or comparison of contraryes when he sayth The one affirmeth that the Predestination of God is the onelye cause of Adams sinne and so consequentlye of all euill And the other affirmeth directly contrary that God or his Predestination is the cause of no sinne or euil And much more vaine is it that he citeth so manye testimonies of Scripture to that purpose For I affirme that which he woulde make men beleue I denye and denye that which he would haue men to thinke I do affirme But one thing I woulde gladly learne of Cerberus That is where he findeth eyther in Scripture or in auncient writer that Adams fall is the fountayne of all euill We may manifestly proue by Scripture that sinne was before Adam fell otherwise there coulde haue bene no tempter to entice him to sinne For God tempteth no man to euill And man had in himselfe no concupiscence or lust to sinne therfore euill was before Adam fell And consequently Adams sal was not the fountain of al euil Sainct Austen in the .ix. Chapter of his firste booke of Retractations sayth that when he with others had diligently searched from whence euill might spring it was agréed vpon amongst them that it had none other fountaine than the frée choyse of the will Mans fall can not then be the fountaine of all euill for there was euill in Aungels before man was made and that sprang out of the frée choyse of the will that was in the Aungelles But graunt that the fall of man had bene the fountayne of all euill might not Gods predestination be the cause of mans fal but it must straight waye follow consequentlye that the same is the cause of all the euill that springeth therof Then tell me maister Cerberus how it may be that Gods predestination is not the cause of all the euill that springeth of the frée choyse of will For this ye wil not deny I am sure that God hath predestinated both men and Aungels to haue the frée choise of wil. And his will alone according to which he hath predestinated all things is the cause why men and Aungels haue the frée choyse of wil. Shal we say therefore that consequently it is the cause of all euill bicause it is the cause of that whereout all euilles do spring No thou hell hound not so God is altogether good and the fountaine of all goodnesse and from him can spring nothing that is not good All those things therfore that spring out of the frée choise of the will are exceding good as God or his predestination is the cause of them and the euill that is in them commeth of the instrument whereby God doth worke those things I pray you therfore loke better vpon your consequently c. As for the sentence that Cerberus citeth oute of S. Austen Non ergo casus ruentium c. I thynke if a man should vpon a Moneth warning require to sée the place where S. Austen writeth those wordes it would be hard for Cerberus to shewe it him And therfore I blame him not though he haue not quoted the place But to do him a pleasure I haue sought it in S. Austens workes and founde it In decimo articulo falso Augustino imposito In the x. of those articles that were falslye ascribed to S. Austen Of what auctoritie that booke of S Austen is may easely appeare to them that will reade his Retractations for it is not mentioned among the bookes that he retracted and reformed in suche pointes as he himselfe misseliked But lest maister Cerberus should saye as the Papistes vse to say of the Protestantes and as some Frée wil men haue said of vs that teache the doctrine of predestination that this is the common shift of all heretikes and obstinate defenders of vntruthes to diminish the auctoritie of Scriptures and sayings of Doctours that are alleaged against them by saying that the same are not autentike or that they maye be suspected not to be the writings of them in whose name they be set abrode I will admit this saying of S. Austen as his owne and that therein he ment as he wrote and that his meaning is true Let vs weigh the wordes of S. Austen therfore and see how his meaning may be true yet agrée wyth the doctrine that we teache The predestination of God sayth he hath neither stirred vp counselled nor enforced the falles of thē that do rush downe headlong nor the malignitie of them that be wicked nor the desiers of them that do sinne but doubtlesse he hath predestinated his iudgement whereby he will rewarde euerye man according to his doings whether the same be good or euill Whiche iudgement should not be if it were the will of God that men shoulde sinne I haue translated these wordes somewhat otherwise than Cerberus doth But whether of vs both better expresse the meaning of S. Austen let the learned iudge And whether I haue not translated theym so that they may serue better for Cerberus purpose than as they are translated by himselfe Let vs therefore loke to the meaning and howe they make with vs or against vs. Sainct Austen teacheth that Gods predestinatiō doth not stir vp entice or enforce any man to sal to be wicked or to haue a desire to sinne And which of vs doth teach y e cōtrary Euen you sir saith Cerberus when ye say that y e Predestination of God must nedes be the only cause of Adams fall To this I haue sufficiently aunswered before if any aunswere wil satisfie Cerberus But yet for further aunswere I saye nowe that I haue not at anye time saide or written that Gods predestination did stirre vp entice or driue Adam to fall Wherfore I haue not taught contrary to S. Austen in thys pointe But Cerberus will saye that our meaning is not alone with S. Austens Let vs therefore examine S. Austens meaning I vnderstand his meaning to be that when man doeth fall is wicked or desireth to sinne his will is not by Gods Predestination stirred vp enticed or compelled thervnto but doth fréely consent therevnto being stirred vp prouoked and driuen forwarde by the tempter and by none other meane if we speake of the first man for in him was not before his fall that concupiscence that is nowe in vs was in him after his fall Whether thys be y e true meaning of S. Austen or no let the learned iudge And why may not the same meaning be gathered of my wordes when I saye that Adam being so perfect a creature that there was in him no lust to sinne and yet so weake that of himselfe he was not able to withstand the assault of the subtile serpent no remedie the onlye cause of his fall must nedes be the Predestination of God I say not that Gods Predestination did stir prouoke or dryue him forward to fall
And why maye I not meane as S. Austen doth in the eleauenth chapter of his booke De correptione gratia where he sayeth as I haue cited before Nec ipsum ergo Deus esse voluit sine sua gratia quem reliquit in su◠libero arbitrio quoniam liberum arbitrium ad malum sufficit ad bonum autem nihil est nisi adiuuctur ab omnipotēti bono quod adiutoriū si homo ille per liberum non deseruissaet arbitrium semper esset bonus sed deseruit desertus est Tale quippe erat adiutoriū quod desereret cum vellet in quopermaneret sivellet non quo fieret vt vellet God therfore sayth Austen would not suffer him to be without his grace whom he had left in hys owne frée choise for free will is able inough to do euill but to do good it hath no power at all except it be holpen of the almighty goodnesse which help if that man had not by his frée wil forsaken he should haue bene good for euer but he did forsake was forsaken For the help was such that he might forsake it when he woulde and suche wherein he might remaine if he woulde not such whereby it might come to passe that he should be willing Doth not S. Austen affirme here that the help of God which Adam had was not suche that by it he might be willing neuer to forsake it And what other cause of this can you find thā the Predestination of God which is according to his euerlasting will vnto the whiche all things are and must be subiect If Cerberus will not be satisfied with thys let him remember the saying of S. Paule which S. Austen doth so often vse to stop the mouthes of the vnaunswereable enimies of Gods frée grace and predestination O altitudo diuitiarum sapientiae scientiae Dei. Quám incomprehensibilia sunt iudicia cius inuestigabiles viae cius O the depenesse of the richesse of the wisedome and knowledge of God Nowe incomprehensible are hys iudgementes and hys wayes past finding out Stay here maister Cerberus go no further I charge you lest ye be thrust headlong into hell for your proube presumption Cerberus And although there be some places of Scripture whervpon they would ground this opiniō that men should sinne by the wyll of God or that God should predestinate or ordeyne men to sinne as where it is sayde that God hardened the heart of Pharao and such like yet partayneth it nothing to that purpose if it be wayed with the rest of the Scriptures For as Austen saith Ipse quasi cos indurat quia iusto iudicio indurari sinit Lib. de essentia Diuinitatis He doth saith Austen as it were harden them bicause that with his iust iudgemēt he suffreth them to be hardened And in his booke De libero arbitrio gratia Cap. 21. he sayeth Where at any time we reade in the scripture that mē be seduced or their hearts hardened of God there may we not doubt but that their wicked deseruings went before lest ye runne sayth he into the saying of Salomon Insipientia viri violat vias cius Deum autem causatur in corde suo The foolishnesse of a man defileth his wayes but he sayeth in his heart God is the cause of this hardening of heart Melancthon in his common places speaketh very plainely saying Nec figure illae verborum offendunt c. Neither sayth he do these figuratiue speaches offēd As I wil harden the heart of Pharao such like For it is certaine that in the Hebrew phrase they signify a permission or suffring and not an effectuall wyl of God as Lead vs not into temptation that is to say Suffer vs not to be led into temptation These are Melancthons woordes And marke what he sayth of the Hebrew phrase for al men know him to be a man learned But to be short it is surely to be maruelled at that although they do thus accuse Gods Predestination to be the only cause of Adams fal which is in dede not onely sinne but also the very welspring of al wickednesse and the filthy foūtaine of all our vncleānesse yet they dare affirme themselues to be the only friendes and louers of Gods Predestination al others to be the enimies of Gods holy Predestination which doe not subscribe to this their fantasticall imagination Moreouer if it should be said that they make God the Autor of sinne they would crie naye and saye they were slaundered But whether God be not the autor of that whereof he is the onelye cause let the vncorrupted heart iudge Also to saye the truth when they see their time and place they are bolde inoughe yea euen to vse the terme Autor in that same manifest sense as in a boke set forth by Iohn Knox against an aduersarie of Gods Predestination as he calleth hym where in the. 158. pagine he sayth thus Therfore whatsoeuer the Ethnickes and ignorant did attribute vnto Fortune wee assigne to the prouidence of God And straight way he sayth We shall iudge nothing to come of fortune but that all cōmeth by the determination of hys counsell And furder it displeaseth him when we esteme any thing to procede from any other so that we do not behold hym and know him not only the principall cause of al things but also the auctour appointing al things to the one part or to the other by his counsell Marke well his wordes and the very sense therof All commeth of God sayth he God is the principal cause and God is the auctour of it whatsoeuer it be God appointeth al things both to the one part and to the other both to the wicked and to the godly all things nothing is excepted aswell damnation as saluation as well sinne as vertue as well wickednesse as holynesse yea if it happen to be murder it selfe for that a little before he rehearseth Whatsoeuer it be it procedeth from none other saith he but frō God God so hath appointed it God is the principal cause of it Yea and not onely the principall cause but also the auctor of it Here seest thou those playne termes which sometime for a little nice lispyng they can not or will not speake that God is the auctour of all murder and mischiefe As for fortune I knowe it to be an Heathenish fable but where he saith that God is not onelye the principall cause but also the auctour of all things without any exception and that whatsoeuer the Ethnickes attributed vnto fortune that same we ought to ascribe to the prouidēce of God it is suche a wide wandring and large blasphemye as hath not bene lightlye heard For who knoweth not that vnto fortune the Ethnickes ascribed treason and craftie conspiracie As where they call her Insidiosa Persida Malesida Vnto fortune they ascribe cruell murder and tyrannicall mischiefe As when they call her Aspera Dura Saeua Truculenta Vnto fortune they ascribed filthy lust and
spiritualis intelligens aterna verax bona pura iusta misericors liberrima immensaepotentiâ—e sapientiae c. That is to saye God is a spirituall essence vnderstanding euerlasting true good pure iuste mercifull moste frée of vnmeasurable power and wisdome c. Nowe if God do permit any thing to be done which he is not willing should be done how is he almightye Other therefore as learned as Melancthon haue sayd in my iudgement truly that to permit and to will is alone in him that can not be enforced to permit or suffer that which he is not willing should be But as I haue declared before we affirme not that the actions wordes and thoughtes of man as they are willed or permitted by God are or can be sinne For he being altogether good and nothing else but goodnesse can not will or permit anye thing that is euill The euill therefore that is in mens thoughtes wordes or actions commeth of the Deuil and mens own willes which God doth will or permit as a meane eyther to set forth his mercie in forgiuing or his iustice in punishing whiche in that respect can not be other than good What Cerberus hath wonne by citing these words of Melancthon let y â— learned that haue read other mens writings vppon this matter iudge I haue sayde that I thinke to be true But now Cerberus thinketh to paye vs home To be shorte sayeth he it is surelye to be maruelled at that althoughe they doe thus accuse Gods Predestination to be the onely cause of Adams sall which is in dede not onely sinne but also the very welspring of all wickednesse and the silthy fountaine of all our vncleannesse that yet they dare affirme themselues to be the onely friendes and louers of Gods Predestination c. Cerberus will be shorte now Well let him be aunswered as shortly He hath all this while laboured to proue that was neuer denied that is that the sinne of Adam in his first fall is the cause of al the sinne that hath bene is or shalbe committed by his posterity For we hold that after Adam had once sinned neyther he nor anye of hys posteritie being naturallye brought forth in this worlde could of them selues do any other thing than sinne The cause wherof we say is that concupiscence and lust to do euil which entred into him from him is descended into his posteritie But what is this to the cause of Adams fall Thys concupiscence was not in Adam before his fall It could not therefore be the cause therof And as I haue declared before Adams fall coulde not be the cause of all sinne for sinne was before Adam fell We knowe that sinne is not a creature but it is a falling away of the creature from that order that the Creator did commaunde the creature to continue in But this was in y â— Aungels Ergo before the fall of maÌ„ By y â— fall of man therfore was declared what mans fréewill was able to do It was able to admit sinne and so by freewill sinne entred into man and by man into the world that is into all naturall men And yet we say not that either mans freewill or man himselfe is euill as he is Gods creature and fréewill Gods gifte I conclude therfore that as the fall of Adam was the performance of Gods purpose so was it no sinne but excéeding good as euery performance of Gods purposes muste néedes be And so the Predestination of God being the cause therof is no cause of sinne Let Cerberus maruel as much as he will how we can graunt God to be the cause and not the Autour of sinne For we do not say that Gods Predestination is the cause of sinne Much lesse doe we say that he is the Autour as Cerberus doth charge vs by occasioÌ„ of certayne wordes written by Iohn Knoxe against an aduersarie of Gods Predestination Although Iohn Knoxe being yet liuing able to defend his owne writings I might refer Cerberus to his aunswere yet I wil not sticke to write a few lines in the defence of his doctrine in this point Cerberus séemeth to mislike with Knoxe for two things one is for that he saith that we assigne to the prouidence of God all things that the Ethnickes and Ignoraunt attributed vnto fortune And the other is for that hée sayth that we know and beholde God to be not onelye the principall cause but also the authour of all things appointing them to the one parte or so the other by hys counsell Thys is sayth Cerberus suche a wyde wandring blasphemie as hath not lightly bene hearde of And although Cerberus would haue vs marke the wordes the very sense of theÌ„ as though he would set forth the same so plainely that al men might easely perceyue the meaning of theÌ„ yet with his leaue he sheweth that he himselfe did not sée that he would haue other to marke For what mad man woulde write words in such meaning as Cerberus would haue vs thinke that Iohn Knoxe wrate his That is to call God deceyisull vnfaythful and vntrusty Rough hard sierce and cruel Bawdy beastly and shamelesse Imperious malapert and proude Blinde and wythout eyes Wicked to be abhorred and altogether naught Was there euer man so farre beside himself as to wryte of God in this meaning I durst appeale to Cerberus himselfe though he be the dogge of Hell whyther in conscience he doe thinke that it were possible that any reasonable man may so far forget him selfe as to write words in any such meaning Let Cerberus therfore loke better vpoÌ„ Iohn Knoxe words and seke a better sense in them than this If he wil do so he shall finde that Iohn Knoxe meaning is that where as the Ethnickes and Ignorant attributed vnto fortune a power to giue or take away to preserue or destroy to helpe or to hinder We which know y â— there is no such power in any other thaÌ„ in God do assigne all these things to his prouidence knowing y â— nothing commeth to passe by Fortune or chauÌ„ce but that God by his prouidence doth gouerne and rule all things appoynting them to the one parte or the other by hys counsell And when he appointeth anye to that thing which in them is sinne as was the murder of Sinacharib in his owne sonnes yet in Gods purpose it is good for it is the execution of his iust iudgement or the meane whereby his glorie shal be the more aduaunced in shewing mercie If Cerberus be not certified with this aunswere let him seke for further aunswere at the hands of him whose writings he hath so maliciously peruerted Cerberus But now to returne againe to Crowley After that he hath written that Gods predestination is the onlie cause of Adams fall then goeth he foorth in the same boke and the same Article vnto the next execrable wickednesse committed in the world saying Now what say we to Cain was he not predestinated to slea his brother No saye
was not elected to the blessednesse whereof Christ spake before when he sayd ye shall be happie if ye doe those things He speaketh not this of all for he knoweth whome he hath chosen to the fellowship of this blessednesse This fellow which did so eate Christes bread that he did lyft vp his héele against him is none of that fellowship c. Againe the same Sainct Austen in the. 62. treatise vpon Iohn sayth thus Nisi ergo se traderet Christus nemo traderet Christum Quid habet Iudas nisi peccatum Neque enim in tradendo Christo salutem nostram cogitauit propter quam traditus est Christus sed cogitauit pecuniae lucrum inuenit animae detrimentum Accepit mercedem quam voluit sed nolenti est data quam neluit Tradidit Iudas Christum tradidit Christus scipsum Ille agebat negotium suae venditionis iste nostrae redēptionis Quod facis facito citius nòn quia tu potes sed quia hoc vult qui omnia potest That is say Except therefore Christ would deliuer vp himselfe no man coulde betraie him What was there in Iudas more than sinne For in betraying Christ he minded not to work our saluation for which Christ was betrayed but his minde was vpon the gaine of monie and he founde the losse of his owne soule He receyued the reward that he desired but that reward which he was not willing to haue was giuen vnto him being vnwilling to haue it Iudas did betraie Christ and Christ did deliuer vp himselfe The one applied his marchandize the other our redemption That thou doest doe quickly sayd Christ not bicause thou art able to do it but bicause he that is able to do all things is willing it should be so Againe in the hundreth and .vij. treatise vpon Iohn he sayth thus Quos dedisti mihi custodiui nemo ex hijs perijt nisi filius perditionis vt Scriptura impleatur Filius perditionis dictus est proditor Christi perditioni praedestinatus secundum Scripturam quae de illo in Psalmo Centesimo octauo maximè prophetatur That is to say I haue kept those that thou hast giuen vnto me and none of them is perished saue only the childe of perdition that the Scripture might be fulfilled He that betrayed Christ is called the childe of perdition bicause he was predestinated to destructiō according to the Scripture which in the Psalme 108. chieflye is prophecied of him Assaine in his questions vpon Exodus and the. 18. question S. Austen sayth thus Assiduè Deus dicit Indurabo cor Pharaonis velut causam insert cur hoc faciat implebo signa mea portenta mea in Aegypto tanquà m necessaria suerit obduratio Pharaonis vt signa Dei multiplicarentur vel implerētur in Aegypto Vtitur ergo Deus benè cordibus malis ad id quod vult ostendere bonis vel quod facturus est bonis That is to say God doth oftentimes say I wil harden Pharaos heart and he doth as it were bring in a cause why he would doe it saying And I will fulfill my signes and wonders in Egypt as though the hardening of Pharao should be necessarie to the multiplying and fulfilling of Gods wonders in Egypt God therfore doth vse well those hearts that be euill for the fulfilling of that thing that he is willing to showe to them that are good or of that which he mindeth to do for them If Cerberus had had eyes to sée he might as well haue séen these places of Austen as that one place which he thinketh so sufficient for the declaration of the whole matter And there is not one of these places that is not of equall authoritie with that one place of his Yea and the first of these places is of greater authoritie as may appeare to them that will reade the bookes of S. Austens Retractations In these places S. Austē saith that Christ chose to be his disciples such men as were born of poore parentage not called to honour and vnlearned that he migh the and do in them whatsoeuer they should be or do The actions therefore that were done by them were his actions and were in him exceeding good although the same were in some of thē excéeding euill This thing is made more plaine in the other places cited oute of S. Austen First he sayth Christ know him that should betraie him and he chose him so much the rather as one necessary for his businesse And againe he sayth speaking of Iudas was not he also elected to some thing wherevnto he was necessarie And againe Except Christ would haue deliuered vp himselfe no man could haue betrayed him What was there in Iudas but sinne As who should say the acte was Christes but the sinne in the acte was Iudasses Yea he saith furder That which thou doest do quickly Not bicause thou art able to do it but bicause he that is able to do all things will haue it so done And last of all he sayth of Iudas that he was called the child of perdition bicause he was predestinated to destruction I suppose if Cerberus had séene and well weyghed these places of Austen he would not haue triumphed so greatly in that one place of his Neyther would he haue derided the iudgement of those that ascribing the acte vnto God do iustly ascribe the sinne of the same acte vnto sinfull man from whose frée choyse consenting vnto euyll the sinne of the acte doth spring and not from God from whom nothing can come that is not excéeding good as it commeth from him But let vs now sée how this hell hound playeth with his owne tayle Cerberus But to returne againe vnto those that contrarie to the Scripture and all auncient writers doe teach that God doeth not onely foresee but also predestinate both good and euill as well the murder of Caine as the holinesse of Abell and thereby make God plainly the Authour of sinne Whē they perceyue the outragious blasphemie to be ouermuch apparant and manifest then doe they sometimes closely rolle it vp in a riddle agayne Which yet for the darke speach thereof may serue at the least to blind the eyes of some As where among many other wayes they plainly make God the Author of sinne is saying that God is not only the principal cause but also the Authour of al things without exception both on the one side and on the other If they be then vrged with the consequence that God is the Authour of sinne they will aunswere that in all abhomination God is the Authour of the fact but not of the crime as of the fact deede or worke of adulterie Sodometrie murder and Idolatrie God is the Author say they but not of the fault or crime This Enigma haue I heard some men vse and it is also written in a booke entitled a briefe treatise of election and reprobation lately set forth and printed in the English tong where he saith thus
we doe neither denie nor call it by the name of destinie except it be so as we may vnderstand Fatum to be deriued of the word For faris that is of speaking For we can not denie but it is wrytten in the holie Scriptures God spake once these two sayings I my selfe hearde it that power belongeth vnto God and vnto thée O Lord belongeth mercie for thou wilt giue vnto euerie man according to his workes And where as it is said he spake once we vnderstand that he spake vnmoueably that is vnchaungeably euen as he did vnchaungeably know al things that are to come and that he himselfe will do After this sort therfore we may say that Fatum or destinie is deriued à fando or speaking if this name had not now bene accustomed to be vnderstāded of another matter wherevnto we are not willing that mens hearts should be enclined Now if Cerberus haue ought to say against this let him make S. Austen one of vs. For we are in this point all one with him Cerberus And as for that which the Heathen did attribute to the starres or planets they meant none other but that God ordeined the planets in nature to worke such things as he before had decreed appointed Euen as we also iudge that God vseth the operatiō of the planets in sending such rayne tempest faire weather or soule as his pleasure is let them say therfore what they cā or wil. This meere necessitie which our men do teach is the verie same which the Stoikes did hold which opinion bicause it destroied the state of a common wealth it was banished out of Rome as Augustine declareth Lib. Quest vet no. Test Where he notably refelleth that opinion in these few words saying Qua ratione nati dicuntur c. By what reason sayth Augustine were they borne which banished Mathematicos the setters forth of destinie out of Rome which law was kept and they were but Heathen howe were those things done by destinie which make agaynst destinie But surely if there be a destinie it doth nothing against it selfe saith Aug. For so were destinie no destinie or at the least destinie fighting agaynst it selfe Or to speake the same in those wordes which our men by abuse take out of the Scripture to maintain the very same matter If it be Gods predestination that men should write and speake agaynst hys predestination as they saye some men do then is Gods predestination a Kingdome not only deuided but also fearcely fighting agaynst it selfe O miserable absurditie which any child may perceyue must needes follow if all things come to passe with absolute necessitie by Gods predestination as they teach Thys same doctrine also that all euill springeth out of Gods ordinance or that Gods predestination was the cause of Adams fall and of all wickednesse is plainly maintained in an English boke lately set forth and entitled agaynst a priuie Papist c. where among many open and plaine sentences vpō this matter I find an argument made in these words Whatsoeuer was in Adam was in him by Gods wil ordināce sinne was in Adam Frgo sinne c. was in him by Gods will ordināce The maior of which argument being vnderstand of Adam after his fall is manifestly false therefore the cōclusion also is false for if it may be sayd of Adam after his fal as by the minor you wel perceyue that he so doth vnderstand it then may it also be sayd now of any man that what execrable wickednesse so euer is in any mā that same is in him by Gods wil ordināce He goth about also to proue the same by another argumēt which he maketh speaking of the lying spirit saying God cōmaūded him to sinne but God commaūded nothing which he ordeineth not so he ordeined him to sinne Which argument it was maruel that any man could be so blind as not to see how it might with more strength and force and much more manifest truth be turned against him in this sort speaking of Adam yea and of all men saying God commaunded Adam and doth commaunde all men to absteine from sinne but he commaundeth nothing which he ordeineth not Ergo God ordeined Adam and all men to absteine from sinne If God then ordeyned Adam and all men to absteine from sinne than did he not ordeyne Adam or any man to commit sinne so was not sinne in Adam or in any man by Gods will and ordinance nor Gods ordynance the cause of Adams fall or of any mans sinne And therefore their opinion is vtterly false also if God in hys secret counsell do predestinate appoint and ordeine man to sinne and yet gyue vnto him a straight law and commaundement not to sinne is not then his secret wyll contrary to his open word and hys eternal ordinance repugnant to his written law All theyr sayre wordes and sine framed fetches can not auoide it Crowley Let vs say what we can or wyll sayth Cerberus the méere necessitie that we teach shall be all one wyth that which the Stoikes helde affirming their Fatum or destinie To this I haue sufficiētly answered before shewing plainly by S. Austens words that we teach none other doctrine herein than did S. Austen in the same booke De Ciuitate Dei out of which Cerberus citeth matter against vs. But nowe Cerberus hath founde another authoritie of saint Austen agaynst vs in his booke as Cerberus sayth which he wrate and entitled Questiones ex vtroque Testamento In the question 115. he sayth thus Qua autem ratione nati dicentur qui Mathematicos vrbe Roma prohibuerūt quod ius seruatum non ignoratur Et certè Pagani fuerunt Quomodo fato fiunt quae contra fatum sunt Sed si est fatum non facit contra se c. That is to say By what order shall it be sayd that those men were borne which did forbydde the Mathematicks that is to say y e tellers of mens fortunes or destinies to come within the Citie of Rome And it is wel knowen that that lawe was kept And doubtlesse these men were Heathen men Howe are those thinges done by destinie which are against destinie But if there be a destinie it worketh agaynst it selfe c. sayth Austen But stay there Master Cerberus and proue that Austen was Authour of that booke So may it be of some authoritie with vs. But Erasmus hath alreadie proued by sūdrie good reasons that S. Austen did neuer write it As may appeare to as many as wyll reade his iudgement set forth before the beginning of this booke Where wryting of this parte of that booke out of which Cerberus hath cyted the wordes aboue wrytten he sayth Disputat contra Mathematicos quoque altius ingreditur opus hoc licentius ineptit That is to say He disputeth agaynst the Mathematicks and the déeper he doth enter into the worke the more outragiously doth he play the parte of a foole But Cerberus wyll not
conclude that I charge al rulers with tyrannie The rulers are commaunded of God who is theyr ruler and to whom they shal render an accompt of their doings that they shall punishe the breakers of Gods cōmaundements and to that ende hath God giuen them a sword Woe vnto them therefore if they do not punysh such and defend the innocent And when they do punish the offenders and defend the innocent then do they their dutie So far of do I thinke them to be from the fault of tyrannie But Cerberus woulde fayne haue the Rulers angrie with vs and especially with Crowley And therefore he laboureth to make thē beleue that Crowley saith that which he neuer thought The words that Cerberus hath cited out of my booke against Shaxton when they be indifferently weyghed shall be found none other in effect than are those wordes that Esaie wrate in the. 45. Chapter of his Prophecies where he sayeth thus Vae contendenti cum sictore suo Testa cum testis terrae contendat An dicet lutum sictori suo quid facis opus tuum manibus destituitur That is to say Wo be to him that doth contende with his maker Let the earthen vessell contende with the earthen vesselles Shall the claye saye vnto him that made it what duest thou make and thy worke is not made with handes What other thing can Esaie meane by these words but that as it is a thing farre vnséemely for a piece of clay to stand vp and reason with him that tempereth it with his fingers and to say vnto him why doest thou fashion me after this sort so is it vnséemely that man should reason with God concerning his purpose in making him after this fashion or that or to this vse or that vse But if man wil reason this matter let him reason it with him y ◠is a man as he is so were there some reason in his doings For although one man haue by Gods ordinance authoritie ouer other men yet may not that man do with the rest what he lusteth as God maye doe with his creatures Wherfore I conclude that Cerberus his exclamation with woe worth the sinfull generation of our age c. is not worth the weighing neyther would Cerberus if he had séene thus much before haue thought it worth the writing as I suppose Cerberus Against which errour crieth out the word of God in a multitude of places manifestly prouing that through the grace helpe of God mē may choose and are neyther driuen by absolute necessitie nor compelled by Gods Predestination to commit murder theft treason or any such flagitious offence nor any maner of sinne or euill whatsoeuer it be As for example Moyses sayth Therefore choose life Deut. 30. And Iosua sayeth choose whome you will serue And after when the people promised to serue the Lord only he sayth vnto them you are witnesses vnto your selues that ye haue chosen the Lord to serue him Iosua 24. But afterward when the people forsoke the Lord agayne and chose other Gods the Lord sayth vnto them Goe crie vnto the Gods which ye haue chosen Iud. 10. Christ sayeth Marie hath chosen hir that good part which shall not be taken from hir Luc. 10. Dauid sayth I haue chosen the way of truth and againe in the same Psalme I haue chosen thy commaundements Psalm 119. But the Lord saith by his Prophet Esay They did wickednesse before mine eyes and chose the thyng that pleased me not Esay 65. and in the next chapter he sayth Et elegerunt quae ego nolui And they haue chosen those things whych I would not Esay 66. Thus it is playne that as choose and can not choose agree together so doth their opinion agree wyth the Scripture for such direct contrarietie is betwene choise and meere necessitie betwene violēt compulsion and christian libertie that blacke and white may wyth more possibilitie be coupled in a subiect But it is maruell to see how scrupulous some mē are in these wordes of choyse I doubt whether they dare read these many such like places of scripture which so plainly speake of choyse But perhap they alway skip ouer that word or reade some other in steade therof as the Iewes do Adonai in steade of Iehouah for surely manie are so afrayde of freewill that they fall as the Prouerbe sayth out of the lime Kell into the cole pit from high presumption into depe desperation fiercelie following that olde spirite of wicked Pelagi as before it is touched in the .ix. of his diuelish errors where he affirmeth that if a mā haue neede of Gods helpe then hath he no freedome or choyse at all Thus do they breake theyr shippe vpon the perillous rocke seeking to escape the daungerous Hurlepole For an horrible presumption it was of Pelagius to thinke that a man by nature had such power to choose good and refuse euill that he needed not the grace and helpe of God and a desperate opinion is this of other to say that the predestination of God worketh all things in man whether it be good or euill and that a man can not choose but do whatsoeuer he doth For no doubt thys opinion maketh a verie disordered Chaos and an vtter cōfusion of al thyngs as it were mixing thrusting together both heauen earth and hell Making one confused lumpe of God the Diuell and the world Of sinne grace and nature turning all doings into dreames all trueth into traunces all veritie into sables all prayer and meditation into vaine imagination For if Gods predestination be the onlie cause of Adams fall and filthie sinne and consequently the onely cause and worker of all euill yea euen wyth compulsion sorce as they shamefully and plainly affirme then will no man denie that on the other side Gods predestination worketh as violently in all thyngs that are good So then if Gods predestination work all without all exception both in euill and good then all other things whatsoeuer they be although they appeare to worke and doe some thing yet doe they in dede vtterly nothyng So that the Diuell doth nothyng man doth nothing lawes do nothing doctrine doth nothing prayer doth nothyng but Gods predestination doth altogether is the efficient cause yea and the only cause of all thyngs Agaynst thys opinion the worde of God is exceding playne and manifest not only in the places before rehearsed but also in these folowing here briefly noted yea and abundantly throughout the whole Scripture Gene. 4. a. Reg. 24. b. 1. Para. 21. b. Pro. 3. d. Eccle. 15. c. 4. Esd 7. b. d. g. e. 9. a. Luk. 10. d. f. Ioā 1. b. Act. 5. a. 1. Cor. 7. g. 9. a. 10. c. 14 f. 2. Cor. 13. c. Phil. 4. c. Heb. 11. Against this euill opinion also doe all the auncient Doctors wyth one cōsent vehemently write as they by themselues cannot denie except only Augustine whych bicause of his exceeding obscuritie and
where none are refused This might suffise for our desence in this matter that Cerberus doth now charge vs withall But bicause he sayth that this our conclusion is the sequele of a proposition that we affirme that is that Gods predestination causeth all sinne and wickednesse I must take some what more paine in the defence of that which we haue written First I must say that Cerberus hath belyed vs For we saye not that Gods predestination doeth cause any sinne Then I must also denie and haue alredie proued that Adams fall was not the originall of sinne Thirdly we denie that the originall of sinne came of God wherfore the conclusion that Cerberus maketh is not against vs. But Cerberus hath found one sentence of ours so open and manifest that it maye serue as well as a thousand It is in the latter ende of the forenamed English booke translated out of French vpon the words of Paul Rom. 9. c. He saith not only c. Cerberus can not sée how this Text of Paul may by those words be better opened than Iourie may be made white with ynke But for hast to come to an ende he will not stande to proue this although he might easely do it as he sayth But touching the two opinions one that actuall sinne or incredulitie the other that originall sinne is the cause of Gods hatred towardes men this fellow sayth Cerberus taketh occasion vpon the example of Esau to exclude all that is in man c. A little helpe woulde make this man of one minde with Origine who writing vpon this parte of Paules Epistle to the Rom. and these verse wordes Iacob haue I loued but Esau I haue hated saith that Iacobs soule being yet without a bodie did purge it selfe and when God saw the purenesse of it he tooke it and put it into that bodie wherin Iacob was borne and Esau his soule which had not cleansed it selfe he put into a bodie made out of the same lumpe but not to honour as the other was bicause the soule of Esan was not worthie of such a bodie So he loued Iacob as Origine thinketh bicause Iacobs soule had cleāsed it self before it came into y ◠body he hated Esay bicause his soule had not cleāsed it selfe If a man should aske this question of Cerberus why did God loue Iacob and hate Esau what could he aunswere if he wyll not say Quia voluit bicause he woulde If he will saye that God respected the actuall righteousnesse and sinne that was in them then shall he be found to ioyne with Origine If he shall saye that he respected originall sinne in Esau and did therfore hate him then may it be asked why he did not hate Iacob for the same For both were defiled therw t alike But if Cerberus wil say that God had respect to y e workes that they should do in the time of their life then doth he ioyne with the Papistes And that he would not séeme to do His best waye therfore shalbe to ioyne with vs and say That God loued Iacob and hated Esau bicause it pleased him so to doe And if any man shall stand vp to dispute the matter any further then to aunswere with S. Paule O homo tu quis es qui respondeas Deo O thou mā who art thou that darest take vpon thée to reason wyth God Cerberus That verie same thyng sayth Knoxe in the. 141. pag. of hys foresayd booke where his wordes are these Further I saye that if Esau was hated for his euill deseruing then must it needes follow that Iacob was loued for hys well deseruing by the Argument following of the nature of contraries As well it might be said it must needes follow by the contraries that if a King or Prince hate one mā whych hath well deserued his hate by stealing from him his ring his chain or some great Iuel thē doth he not loue any other man but he whych hath well deserued hys loue by giuing to hym a ryng a chain or some great treasure as though he should say bicause iustice worketh on the one side therfore mercie hath nothing to doe on the other side or as though God were not both iust mercifull Iust in damning for their offence those which are damned and mercifull in sauing without their desert those which are saued And who seeth not that neyther simile nor dissimile neyther like thyngs nor thyngs contrarie do holde in all poyntes for nothing is so like whych in somethyng is not vnlike neyther any thing so contrarie whych doth in all things varie Christ is likened to a Lion but did he euer rauish or deuour and shedde any innocent bloude Latimer wysheth that al Byshops were like Byshop Diuell in diligence thē ought not the Diuell and a Byshop to differ in all thyngs And most specially and plainely doeth the Scripture beate in our heads aboue al other things that the nature of contraries doe not holde in both sides of Gods reward mans deseruing For as they are inseparable relatiues in the one part so on the other side the one hath neuer any relation to the other for as Gods hatred and vengeaunce hath euer relation to mans deseruing so hath Gods loue and mercie neuer any relation to mans merite Yea all the Scripture teacheth vs that God neuer hateth or punisheth man wythout his owne deseruing For as the wyse man sayth Et cum qui nullam poenam commeritus sit cōdemnasse a tua potentia iudicas alienum And thou Lord sayth he estemest it a thyng contrarie to thy power to haue condemned him whych hath not deserued punishment What should be sayde of the Cananites and the Israelites if the nature of contraries do alway hold and haue such relation of the one to the other must it not then necessarily follow as he sayth by the nature of contraries that if the Cananites were cast out of the fortunate land that floweth wyth milke and hony for their euill deseruing that on the other side the Israelites were brought and planted into that same happie and blessed rest for their well deseruing But what sayth the Scripture Speake not in thy heart after that the Lorde thy God hath cast them out before thee saying for my righteousnesse the Lorde hath brought me in to possesse thys lande naye but for the wickednesse of those Nations the Lorde doth cast them out before thee So plainly speaketh the holie ghost here that thou mayst easily perceyue how grosse and vayne their saying is which affirme That if God hate an euill man for his owne euill deseruing then must it nedes follow that he loueth a good man for hys owne well deseruing For the hatred of God and euerlasting damnation are iust rewardes of mans euil deseruing but the loue of God and euerlasting life are free gyftes of God for Christes sake wythout any part of mans owne deseruing Take therefore this saying of theyrs No sinne neyther originall nor actuall
by sinne he made himself a reprobate and was not refused before he sinned But let vs sée how this place of the wise man maketh for his purpose The words are these as Cerberus citeth them Et cum qui nullam poenam commeritus sit condemnasse a tua potentia iudicas alienum And thou Lorde estemest it a thing contrarie to thy power to haue condemned him that hath not deserued punishment All the Scripture is nowe by Cerberus brought into a short summe For it is knit vp in lesse than two lines written in the .xij. Chapter of the booke of wisdome Of what authoritie that booke hath awayes bene thought to be I thinke Cerberus is not ignorant And how diuers readings there be of that place which he cyteth I suppose he knoweth The Tygurine Bible is it that Cerberus followeth Other translations there be that differ from that and from the olde also The olde translation hath it thus Cum ergo sis iustus iustè omnia disponis ipsum quoque qui nòn debet puniri condemnas exterum aestimas à tua virtute That is Forasmuch as thou thy selfe art iust thou doest dispose all things iustly him also that ought not to be punished thou doest condemne and doest esteeme him as one exiled from thy power or dominion Bylike when Cerberus cited this place he supposed that no mā should sée his booke but such as were not able to discerne Chalk from Chéese What place can make more manifestly against him and for vs than this place doeth For by these wordes it is plaine that though God do condemne him that hath not by any déedes deserued to be condemned yet is God neuer the latter iust and doth dispose all things iustly Yea and the circumstance of the Text doth shew that this translation is more nigh the meaning of the writer thā is that which Cerberus followeth For the sentence going immediatly before is thus Neque Rex neque tyrannus in conspectu tuo inquirent de hijs quos perdidisti That is Neyther King nor tyrant will in thy presence make inquisition for them that thou hast destroyed And the sētence that doth immediatly follow is thus Virtus enim tua iustitiae initium est ab hoc quod omnium Dominus es omnibus te parcere facis That is For thy power is the beginning of iustice and bycause thou art Lord of all thou doest make thy selfe to spare all But bicause there is such diuersitie of translations in the Latine and peraduenture Cerberus wyll saye he hath loked in the Gréeke and findeth that the Tygurine translation which he followeth is most agréeable to the Gréeke Text out of which all our Latine translations are taken It shall not be amisse therfore to set downe the Gréeke Text that suche as haue any skill therein may iudge betwixt vs. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is to say so far as I am able to vnderstād it Thou being iust doest dispose all things iustly cōmaunding to condemne straunge from the land of thy power him y t is not to be iudged ignominious If any cā sée any other meaning in this Gréeke text I wil not contende for I sée that many men of great learning haue varied in opinion about the translation therof But graunt that Cerberus haue cited that translation that is according to the true meaning of the Text what hath he wonne thereby Shall all the Scripture be on his side bicause it is written in y e booke of wisdom that God estemeth it a thing contrarie to hys power or more truly after the Latine Text that Cerberus citeth a thing straunge from his power to condemne him that hath not deserued punishment I thinke not For the booke of wisedome is of that sort of bookes that must be made to agrée with y e Canonical bookes the Canonicall bookes must not be enforced to agree with it For it is Apokryphe that is a booke permitted to be read priuatly but not of such authoritie that we may builde our fayth vpon euerie sentence in it But graunt that this booke were of as great authoritie as any other booke of Scripture is should we thinke that God might not iustly refuse such of his creatures as it pleaseth him not to choose vnlesse the same creatures had first by sinne made them selues vnworthie to be chosen We must not restraine God of his libertie to doe wyth his creatures what he himselfe will Neyther must we say or thinke that any thing that he doth is or can be other than iust albeit that we can not vnderstand howe the same shoulde be iust We must therefore wyth reuerend seare seeke another meaning of thys place than Cerberus doth teach vs let vs thinke therefore that God speaketh here of therecution of his iudgement and not of election And it shalbe good for vs to say always wyth S. Austen that the cause of Gods doings may be secrete so that we can not know them but vniust they can not be But Cerberus séemeth to himselfe to haue gotten a great aduauntage by the example of the Cananites and Israelites The Cananites were driuen out for theyr sinnes and this was iustice but the Israelites were put in their place without deseruing and that was mercie Wherefore in refusing God worketh by iustice and in choosing he worketh by mercie As though there were no difference betwene choosing and refusing of creatures and the vsing of them when they be chosen or refused God chooseth and refuseth without respect of good or euill deseruings but he maketh not his refusal knowen vnto men till the refused haue by theyr sinnes shewed them selues worthie to be refused And though the chosen sort neyther do nor can shewe themselues worthie for theyr good workes to be chosen yet before they receyue the great blessing promised they shewe themselues by theyr workes lesse worthie to be refused than the other And to this do the Scriptures that Cerberus hath cited out of Moses Paule O sée and the rest full well agrée But it followeth not hereof that therefore God had not refused the wicked sort before they sinned It is true that death is the rewarde of sinne but it is not true that euerie one that sinneth receyueth that reward for Christ came to saue sinners and the frée gift of euerlasting life is bestowed vpon such sinners as were elected in Christ before the beginning of the world It is true also that man destroyeth himselfe by the frée consent of his will to do contrarie to the commaundement of God that his helpe and succour commeth of God alone yet doth it not therfore follow that no man is refused of God before he haue cōmitted sinne whereby he destroyeth himself For when the elect were chosen in Christ then were the rest refused For otherwise it could not be an election but a generall acceptation As for the saying that Cerberus sayth is ours and would haue his friend to lay it in the one side of