of sin So far was Carpocrates from such a boldnesse that being not able to discern how the will of men and Angels was able to choose the things forbidden and to refuse the things commanded aâ—d thereby to be the cause of sin he rather chose to say that there is no sin at all that good and evil are only words and only differ in the fancies and opinions of men than to say that one God is the cause of both For if all things are done by Gods will and decree they must all be good because he will'd and decreed them But Carpocrates thought then what our Adversaries say now that all things are done without exception by Gods will and decree upon which he conluded â—that all things are good without exception and that sin as well as conscience is nothing else but a political or Ecclesiastical word So that his foul Heresie of making no sin at all in comparison of the other which feigneth God to be its Author may also seem a pretender to some Degree of Reformation From both these cases it doth appear that the very worst of the worst opinions must be that which makes God to be the Author of sin and when men are frighted by such a Fiend to fly for sanctuary to any thing that lyeth next let every rational man judge how smooth a passage lay open for such as Carpocrates and Marcion to enter and lye down and nuzzle themselves in an opinion that there is no God at all and that Atheisme it self is a comparative Reformation that is a flying out of the greatest into somewhat a lesser evil All which mischiefs would be avoided if men were so humble as to acknowledge that they themselves are the Authors of sin and misery 2 That their Wills are free and not necessitated to sin 3 That being free they can choose either to shun or to embrace it 4 That God's witholding of grace is no mans guilt but mans abusing of grace which God afforded 5 That God expecteth to receive after the measure that he hath given 6 That no man living can be condemned for never having had a Talent but for having been an ill seruant in wilfully squandring it away or in the wilful neglect of its Improvement And now I hope it is evident from all that hath hitherto been spoken that there was reason and modesty in all I said concerning modest and immodest Blasphemers who say directly or indirectly That God is the Author and cause of sin And therefore § 9. Ninthly My Reverend Assailant is least of all to be excused for that which he adds in the last part of this Paragraph viz. that their Lord and Brethren before them have met with the same measure Mar. 2. 7. Mat. 26. 65. Act. 6. 13. But here I ask him and let him answer if he is able and if he is not let him confesse his error Did Christ ever let fall such expressions as those which I have proved to be blasphemous Did our Lord and Master ever say that men do break God's Law by God's own Impulse or Compulsion or by his precept and command That God can will that man shall not fall by his revealed will and in the mean while ordain by his seâ—ret will that the same man shall infallibly and efficaciously fall Did our Saviour ever say so much as in appearance That God doth make men Transgressors That Adultery is the work of him the Author mover and Impeller That God's Decree is no less efficacious in the permission of evil than in the production of good That God doth not only prostitute men to sins and administer the occasions of sinning but doth also so move and urge them that they may smite the sinners minde and really affect his imagination Was He called Blasphemer for such things as these and were not These the very things upon which in My Notes I laid my charge Things confessed to be Blasphemie by the very Authors and Patrons of them when in their sober fits or lucid Intervals they look upon them as spoken by other men See the matchless absurdity of the comparison by consulting those Texts to which my Adversary refers us Iesus said to the sick of the palsie Son thy sins be forgiven thee upon which said the Scribes within their hearts why doth this man thus speak blasphemies Mark 2. 7. Iesus toâ—ilate â—ilate that he was the Christ the son of God whereupon the High Priest rent his cloaths saying He hath spoken blasphemie what farther need have we of witnesses Behold now ye have heard his Blasphemy Mat. 26. 65. St. Stephen did miracles among the people and disputed against the Iews and therefore they suborned men to say that they heard him speak blasphemous words Acts 6. 11 13. Let these sayings of Christ and of St. Stephen be well compared with the sayings of Mr. Calvin and his Disciples and we shall find the difference to be as great as betwixt Christ and Calvin betwixt the followers of Christ and the followers of Calvin betwixt St. Stephen and Dr. Twisse or betwixt me and those Iews in our several Churches And here I challenge his answer to this Dilemma Did our Lord and St. Stephen meet with the very same measure from the Iews which the men whom I cited received from me or did they not If he shall answer that they did then must he prove that the sayings of those men whom I cited were as far from blasphemy as the saying of Christ and St. Stephen or that the sayings of Christ and St. Stephen had as much of blasphemie in them as those which I cited for making God to be the Author of sin But if he shall answer that they did not he must not only eat his words in a Corner but make publick satisfaction not only to me but to every one of those Authors whom I have quoted in this chapter speaking much more sharply than I have done He alone is to be blamed that this Dilemma doth fall so very heavily upon him It was no fault of mine that he would needs utter that which reflecteth upon him with so much sharpnesse but on the contrary I wish aâ—d I wish it heartily that he had either brought me an harder argument or at least that he had given me a softer word CHAP. V. E. R. There have been men of great Learning and not wholly devoted to the Iudgment of Calvin who have taught even Dissenters thus to say of him Calvino illustri viro nec unquam sine summi honoris praefatione nominando non assentior T. P. § 1. BEhold the utmost that I can gather from this third way of arguing Men of great learning have spoken honourably of Calvin therefore I have done ill to call that blasphemie whereby God is concluded to be the Author of sin It might suffice me to say that I deny his Sequel but I have something to say besides for first there is not a Page in all my Notes
do not come or if they come they do not stay with him they wilfully reject the counsel of God against themselves And so have received the grace of God in vain § 3. The Fourth proposition in this Section being wholly the same with the seventh and eighth of the former Section may be sent thither for its Answer as having there sufficiently been spoken to yet here my Assailant is to be thank't for saying so plainly and expresly That men do fall into Damnation as they themselves know by their own wills and whereof themselves are the alone Causes and Authors For if this is heartily acknowledged as here it is very plainly Then 1. Farewell to Austin's rigid sentence pronounced upon un baptized Infants for the Infants fall not by their own wills or against the light of their understandings they having no use of either faculty 2. Farewell all consideration of Adams sin in the Damnation of any Creature for they that are damned saith my Assailant are the alone Causes and Authors of their Damnation and if so then was Adam no part of the Cause or Author If I had said thus much how many times had I been called a Semipelagian and of what Correptory Correction had I been thought worthy But now 3. Farewell to all that is said by Mr. Barlee against the second Chapter of my Notes For I had said only that man is the sole efficient Cause and explain'd my self sufficiently by saying that Satan and the Protoplast were Promoters of my Guilt p. 6. But my Assailant saith farther that mans own will is the alone Cause aud the alone Author of his Sin and Damnation Which gives me occasion to admire how M. Barlee could read this passage in his worthiest Friend and raile so vehemently against it as to say it fights against God against Scripture against all Authority antient and later Again I admire how D. Reynolds could read all that bitterness of his Friend against this part of his own Epistle and yet retain this proposition which is there so rai'ld at yea and how he could commend his Reviler's work for an Elaborate and learned Thing Nor is the wonder lessened in that the ill language of all those pages is directed to me by name and not to D. Reynolds since the Doctrine against which the ill language is levell'd is delivered by D. Reynolds as well as by me nay by D. Reynolds after me nay by D. Reynolds in defense of me even in that Epistle which was intended against me in partiality to Mr. Barlee nay by D. Reynolds more obnoxiously and more unwarily then by me nay more like Massilian and Pelagian by D. Reynolds then by me Let both our words be considered and I do seriously believe that he himself will say as much § 4. What is added in the position concerning God's Permission and gubernation c. is gratis dictum as to me and cannot with any the least colour be fitly aimed against my words who said as much in my Notes § 12. But only against his and my Correptory Corrector who besides permission and Gubernation disposing and ordering is for Determination and stirring up as a Man puts spurs to a Dull Iade it is his own simile So that if my Rd. Assailant doth here mean no more then he speaks not conceiving that God's will of permitting sin is efficacious nor that he doth impel men to any thing that is unlawful nor that he did Decree Adam to contract a vitiosity by his Fall as Dr. Twisse speaks then the things which I accused as blasphemous may still be blasphemous by his free leave and I shall once more thank him for having thus joyned with me against the Correptory Corrector And since he professeth to be sorry for having been led so far in another mans proper work I will have so fair an opinion of him as to believe that from this time forward he will express his sorrow by his Amendment CHAP. XII E. R. I was glad to see two orthodox and sound Axioms stand before the book of your Author as the Basis of his Superstructure Two men of quite different judgments in these very Arguments I find to have done so before The one Cassianus the Collator of whom Prosper hath these words Catholicarum tibi aurium judicia conciliare voluisti quibus de praemissae Professionis fronte securis facile sequentia irreperent si prima placuissent Which words of his bring into my mind a saying of the Historian Fraus fidem in parvis sibi praestruit ut cùm operae pretium sit cum magnâ mercede fallat and the censure of Austin upon Pelagius Gratiae vocabulo frangit Invidiam offensionem declinat The other the famous Arch-Bishop Bradwardine whom learned and good men will honour notwithstanding the hard censure passed by Hugo Grotius upon him who premiseth two Hypotheses as the ground of that profound work of his De Causâ Dei I will have so fair and just an opinion of your Author as to believe that he did this in Candor and Integrity following therein rather the learned example of Bradwardin then if Prosper's Censure may be taken the Artifice and cunning of Cassianus yet because this is a course which may by the Credit of true Principles draw the less cautelous and circumspect Readers to consent to deductions not naturally consequent upon them it is requisite as for writers as Pliny adviseth Saepius respicere Titulum so for Readers to follow the Apostles Counsel to prove all things and hold fast that which is good T. P. § 1. THis is somewhat a strange Paragraph in several respects For first 't is apparently unkinde because although he professeth that I had two great patterns for what I did whereof one was most excellent in his own opinion nay though he professeth to have so just an opinion of me as to believe I followed Bradwardin rather then Cassianus and that I did what I did in Candor and integrity he did yet make choise to begin his Descants upon the other not insisting on the good meaâ—ing of Arch-Bishop Bradwardin but on the fraud cunning of the Presbyter Cassianus Yet secondly he makes me some part of requital by confessing my two principles to be a couple of orthodox and sound Axioms and that they were the Basis of my superstructure Now he cannot but confess that where the deductions are duly made nothing but truth can be inferred from truth such good Trees as two orthodox and sound Axioms cannot bring forth such corrupt fruit as my Notes were accused of by the Correptorie Corrector Had not my Deductions been naturally consequent upon my grounds as here it is hinted and meerly hinted but no where held forth that I can find no doubt but some of the grieved party would have endeavoured at least to find it out And had they found any such thing no doubt but I should have heard on 't with both my
I have collected in no more than 8. or 9. pages in my Accompt of the Correptory Correction If such of these are no Blasphemies then am not I to be excused for having avowed them to be such But if they are Blaspemies in grain and published to the world by the Authors of them and if the Authors of these Blasphemies are led into them by those opinions which my Reverend Adversary asserteth and I resist how will he make me a reparation for having publickly done me so great a wrong as to blame me for my distinction How can he answer to all good Men to the Church of God and to God himself that it was matter of trouble to him that I should make a distinction of modest Blasphemers and others who for Ligionem Ligonem Is it not a Blasphemy to speak against God Is it not the very blackest and most insufferable-Blasphemy to speak against the very purity and holinesse of God Is not his Purity himself and therefore it is not worse to asperse his purity than to deny his being And have not those Men whom Dr. Reynolds pleads for aspersed the purity of God with all the Fowlest Affirmations that can be thought on Let him or any Man living sit down and study with what variety of words and phrases it is possible to express the Author of sin and I will publickly demonstrate that all that variety of words and phrases hath been used even in print by the Men of that way which he asserteth and I resist in direct Affirmations of God himself I am sufficiently prepared to shew a very large Catalogue besides the several Catalogues already shewn And though I was so courteous as not to name them at the first yet I had reason to say that there were some in the world for Ligonem Ligonem And § 3. Thirdly when I said that some were modest Blasphemers that is bashful and shamefac'd but did not name any Creature I meant Such Writers as have only made God to be the Author of sin by way of necessary consequence and unavoidably deduction but have not said with Borrhaeus that God is the Author of evil whether of punishment or of sin nor with Zuinglius That Adultery or Murder is the work of God nor with Piscator That whatsoever sinners and flagitious men do they do it by the sorce of God's own will nor with Sturmius That God effecteth those things which are sins nor with Musculus that Gods Reprobation is the cause of the incurable Despair nor with Triglandius That both the Elect and Reprobates were preordained to sin quatenus sin nor with Beza That God predestin'd whom he pleased not only to damnation but to the causes of damnation nor yet with Peter Vermilius That God seemeth to be the cause not only of humane actions but of their very defects and privations nor yet with Smoutius that Man ought to have sinned and to have fallen from grace that God might have matter whereon to manifest his Iustice. Now if I was so civil as not to name either the modest or the immodest Blasphemers I should rather have been thank'd by their Disciples and Followers than have been reviled for my civility But § 4. Fourthly Let us descend in particular to those Things and Persons of which my Reverend Antagonist hath undertaken a defense I mean the Citations in my Notes p. 9. and 10. I will begin with that of Zuinglius because neither Mr. B. nor his Friends have yet discovered it to be his at least they have not owned it under its Authors own Name When God makes an Angel or a Man a Transgressor he himself doth not transgresse because he doth not break a Law The very same sin viz. Adultery or Murder in as much as it is the work of God the Author Mover and Compellor it is not a Crime but in as much as it is of Man it is a wickednesse Is not the scope of those words undeniably this That although God is not a sinner yet he maketh both Angels and Men to be so That Adultery or Murder is the work of God although it is not evil in as much as it is his that God is the Author of sin viz. Adultery or Murder though sin is not sin in as much as He is the Author of it nay that God is a Compeller of Men to sin though it is only sin as Men commit it and not as God compels them to it If this cannot be denied why then said the Prefacer that such words are no where to be found in them but rather the contrary That they are there to be found is apparent to all eyes which shall examine the place by my quotation and is abundantly confessed by Dr. Twisse Whom I observe in that place not only approving but commending Zuinglius for those expressions which being every whit as bad as if he had spoken the words himself is all that here needeth to be said of him besides that the sixth seventh ninth and tenth instance in my Notes may here be noted to have been his My first Citation from Mr. Calvin That all things happen by God's Decree c. Without any the least exception of all ungodly and sinful things nay purposely including as well the evil as the good as I shall prove by and by will soon appear to be a Blasphemy to wit a constituting God the Author of sin by the publick confession of Mr. Calvin himself For in a fit of Anger against the Libertines and in other fit of Forgetfulness which Anger easily produceth what himself had said at other times he chanced to let fall these expressions Whilst the drunken Libertines do jabber that all things are made or done by God they constitnte him the Author of Sin Yet Beza saith plainly more plainly than the Libertines That God efficaciously acteth or effecteth all things without any the least exception whatsoever And that Calvin means the same thing when he saith that all things happen by God's Decree is not only very evident by his agreement with Beza in these affairs but by his own positions in other parts of his works as when he saith for example that God did therefore Foresee things because he decreed them and again that no other cause can be rendred for the defection of Angels then that God did reject them Which is to say in effect That God by his rejection or reprobation was the only cause of the first and greatest sin that ever was to wit the defection or rebellion or Apostacy of Angels and again he saith that Man doth sin or do that which is not lawful for him to do which we know is all one impulsu Dei by God's impulse or compulsion or inforcement let him translate impulsus which way he pleaseth And this last as well as the first being one of my instances p. 9. I admire the Author of
this Preface would seek to justifie such horrid Things What pretense of Reason he had for so doing Besides his partiality and concernmen for one of the chiefest of his Party we shall see hereafter in his Reply § 5. Fifthly whilst he blameth me for giving the Title of modest or immodest Blasphemy to such as make God to be the Author of Sin sometimes in those very words sometimes in such as are equivalent and sometimes worse he quite forgetteth how great a Contumely he hath heaped upon them who have spoken more broadly than I have done though not with a purer or more disinteressed zeal to the honour of his Attributes for whom I pleaded May he be pleased to consider these following Instances 1. When Florinus did but seem to make God the effecter or Cause of Sin although he said it only by Consequence and not in plain or downright terms yet Irenaeus an Apostolical Father thought it fit to confute him and chide him too And intituled his Epistle which he wrote to Florinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning God's not being the cause of Sin It may satisfie some Readers to be told a few of the Fathers own words These Opinions O Florinus are not of wholesome Doctrine they are disagreeable to the Church they carry them that believe them into the greatest Impiety These opinions the very Hereticks without the Church were never so daring as to affirm the Elders before us who conversed with the Apostles delivered no such things unto us To which he adds I am able to testifie before God that if Polycarp had heard any such things he would have stopped his Ears and have cryed out as he was wont O good God unto what times hath thou reserved me that I should indure such things He would have fled from the place wherein he sat or stood when he had heard such expressions And this might be manifested saith Iranaeus out of Polycarp's Epistles which were written to Neighbour-Churches or to some of the Brethren the words follow thus as a new Testimony 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. When St. Augustin was accused by some of his Correptory Correctors of having Denyed universal Redemption and other things of that nature which all my Adversaries do hold and teach he was so angry and so impatient of such slanderous Imputations that he could not with-hold his pen from sharper language than I have used though more provoked than he could be He did not only say that those ungodly and profane opinions had not the very least footstep in his Heart nor did he content himself to call them Blasphemies but prodigious lyes of most foolish Blasphemies and no less than Diabolical 4. When the same Austin was accused by some Pelagians of making God an Accepter of Persons by asserting irrespective and unconditional degrees of Reprobation and Election he did not give them the lye only but told them besides they were bewitched by the Devil to its invention what then are They who either directly or indirectly do make God himself to be the Author of sin 5. When the French Massilians objected it as the opinion of St. Austin that God denieth perseverance to some of his Sons who are regenerate in Christ because they were not elected out of the Masse of perdition Prosper makes answer in these expressions That of those that are regenerate in Jesus Christ some forsaking their Faith and pious maners do apostatize and fall from God and end their wicked life in that aversion is proved too plainly by many examples But to ascribe their fall to God is an immoderate wickednesse as if God were the Impulsor aud Author of their ruine because he foresaw that they would wilfully fall away and for that very reason did not sever them from the sons of perdition and therefore men ought not to calumniate God How many wayes this makes for me and my cause againg my revereud Assailant let who will judge 6. The second Arausi can Councel which was held in the time of Leo the first against the Semiplegians let that be marked as it hath much for my cause who have been publickly calumniated for more than Semipelagianism so it hath this sharp passage against the very Man that hath opposed me This we believe according to the Catholick Faith that all who are baptized and have by Baptism received grace are both able and bound in duty by Christ his help and cooperation to fulfil those things which do belong unto Salvation if they will faithfully labour in order to it But that any were Predestinated to Evil by the divine power we do not only not believe but withal if there are any who will believe so great an evil we do with all detestation pronounce an Anathema against them If the indifferent Reader will compare this definition of that Councel with either my greater or lesser Catalogue of those horrible doctrines which I condemned and for the condemning of which I have been publickly condemned by that reverend Person with whom I now deal he will not fail to think it much more than strange For as all the great and holy Men of that so venerable a Councel who were deeply acquainted with the mind of God in his word have detested those Doctrines as well as I so that unseasonable reproof to say no worse which was given to me by my Antagonist doth reach as far as those Fathers of which that Councel was composed 7. In Nicetas his Saracenica there is this solemn form of renouncing Mahomed and his Religion I do Anathematize the Blasphemy of Mahomed saying that God deceiveth whom he will and whom he will he leadeth to what is good for if God would Men would not war one with another but he doth what he will and is himself the cause of all good and of all evil all things are governed by Fate and Destiny which infers a necessity of all events If the Authors whom I cited both in my greater and lesser Catalogue have said the very same things with the Idolaters of Mahomed and every whit as much worse as worse may be and whether they have not so done I appeal to all who shall compare them it will not be much for my Adversaries credit that the loss of my thanks should be the best reward of my Devotion 8. Melancthon saith that no Stoical opinions are to be brought into the Church for how can he call upon God who holds that all thengs do come to pass of necessity Plato though a Heathen doth speak more honourably of God and would have every one banished from the Society of men who should say in a Poem or any other narration that God is the cause of any Mans evil In the opinion of Melancthon they make a Stoical God who feign him giving a necessity to all events And is not that to blaspheme him without saying in terminas he is the Author of Sin Whilst
in another I will manifest how very patly those Censures do hit themselves § 6. Sixthly therefore Is it not so that Mr. Calvin disputing against the Libertines is fain to say in plain terms that from this one Article God worketh all things three things do follow extremely frightful of which the first is that there will be no difference between God and the Devil c. nay further in the next Chapter that God must be renouuced by himself and be transmuted into the Devil And doth not Beza himself incur that censure whilst he so interprets that Text God worketh all things Ep. 1. 11. As to say to that that unversal particle all could not be restrained by any the least exception that sins themselves cannot be excepted And doth not Calvin say again the direct contrary to Beza that S. Paul there speaks only of the graces of the Holy Ghost and yet doth not Beza cite Calvins own judgement for his exposition which is so contrary to Calvins as when he saith that in the judgement of Calvin those things which are wickedly done by Men are the righteous works of God And again doth not Calvin incur his own censure by what he saith in my greater and lesser Catalogue and in many other places which I can name if challenged to it or if he had not thus spoken against himself yet is it sufficient for my plea against my Assailant that he hath spoken such bitter things as have lighted so heavily upon his own Party He saith expresly elsewhere that it is a monstrous prodigious Blasphemy to say that God is the Author of Sin and consents that any thing be said against it Now it having been evidenced as it shall be also farther that the chief men of his Party have affirmed that horrible proposition both in equivalent and down-right Terms and in Terms of a more fulsom and blacker strain it being worse to compel men to sin than to be simpliciter an Author of it I was permitted by his leave to have spoken as sharply as any Bolsec of those expressions which I mentioned and I had thanks due to me for having been no sharper 2. Doctor Whitaker himself hath these words following If Calvin or Martyr or any of our Men affirm God to be the Author and cause of sin I do not deny our being guilty all of us of detestable Blasphemy and wickednesse Here the Reader may observe a very remarkable Concession in 3. respects First if any of their Party shall so affirm not only Calvin and Martyr Secondly if any shall so affirm they are all of them guilty without exception of which the reason must needs be this because they do all without exception hold the very same principles of irrespective Decrees of Reprobation c. and the absolute necessity of all events from whence any of them do draw such detestable conclusions Thirdly that they are all of them guilty of horrible blasphemy and wickednes if there is any Truth in that supposition From which three things I do in charity conclude that if Doctor Whitaker had observed such affirmations of his party as have been observed by Melancthon learned Moulin my insignificant self and many others without number he would have been frighted out of their Tenents of unconditional reprobation as Melancthon and Moulin are known to have been For Zuinglius Martin Borrhaeus and others have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in plain Terms that God is the Author of the evil of sin and that sin is the work of God and particulariz'd in Adultery and Murther Zanchy hath said that Men were prae-ordained by God to sin as sin Piscator hath assirmed that Reprobates are predestin'd to the very Causes of Damnation that is to sins and that Incredulity by name doth depend upon God's Predestination as the Cause upon the effect Triglandius saith God willeth and effectheth that ungodly Men do live in their concupiscences Musculus avoweth that God's Reprobation is the hidden Cause of final despair no peccadillo These are some of that party and of the chief Come now to those Men which he particularly nameth viz. Calvin and Martyr Calvin saith That there is no other cause of the Angels Defection which was the first and greatest sin that ever was but God's rejection or Reprobation Nay farther that Men do sin by God's Impulse And Peter Martyr speaks as broadly as ever Man did which though I have publickly shewed already yet because he is the Man whom Doctor Whitaker thought fit to Name I shall set down a passage which I have since observed in reading his Comment upon the Book of Samuel The vulgar sort saith he are of opinion that when God is said to blind to harden to deliver up to send delusions and to deceive nothing else is signified but that he permitteth that those things be done And to that same purpose very many of the Fathers he should have said all do interpret those expressions And doubtless they were induced so to do because they thought it impious and blasphemous that God should be accounted the Author of sin and because they were unwilling that Men should lay the causes of their sins upon God himself But he would have them all to know that God doth not only permit but also Will Sin Here we have a Taste of this valiant Florentine who contemns the cowardize of the vulgar such as Melancthon and Hemmingius and the squeamishnesse of the Primitive Fathers because they were startled at such Buggs as God's being the Author or cause of sin So again in his Comment upon the Epistle to the Romans he confesseth that all the Fathers at least almost all do teach that to deliver up to sin doth signify no more than to suffer or permit or forsake because they have an abhorence to the saying that God is the cause of sin But he rejects their opinion and pretends to refel it by striving to dissipate their Reasons p. 79 80. and so he finally concludes against them and to confirm what he hath done without the least fear of the Fathers Scar-Crowes he makes Austin to be for him whom he confesseth to be against him and whose words against him he first of all citeth before those others which he will have to make for him From all which it followes that I had the favourable allowance of Mr. Calvin and Dr. Whitaker to accuse those writers of horrid Blasphemy and wickedness who are commended by my Adversary for their deep acquaintance with the mind of God But I have not yet shewed him the last degree of his misfortune in that Assault which he made upon my Cause and Reputation For § 7. Seventhly I have the suffrage and Vote almost of all and of such whom I am sure he will not dare to contradict that the men of that party which he defendeth are guilty of all and
I am extreamly addicted to the Mâ—sse of Ceremonies with how profound an Incongruity English Scholars may now judge 11. The most learned Bishop Mountague with whom for knowledge of Antiquity perhaps there have not been many who will compare hath left these words upon Record in his very Appeal to King Iames whom my Assailant hath quoted as an utter Enemy to Arminius unlesse from damned Hereticks or stoical Philosophers I never yet read in Antiquity of any prime previous determining Decree by which men were irrespectively denyed grace excluded from Glory or enforced to Salvation Should I set down the censures of as many writers as I am able wherewith my Adversaries Doctrins have been condemned I should hardly make an end before the Greek Calends I hope that these are sufficient to convince my Reverend Antagonist that I was not the first much less the only Person who hath spoken severely of those opinions in opposition to which my Notes were written and that few have ever spoken of them with greater Patience and moderation then I there did and that He by consequence hath misplaced his reprehensions and under pretense of beating me hath struck at those Authors whose words I have alleaged in this long Section and whether purposely or through Incogitancy I cannot tell he hath scourged them all upon my Back Not only Grotius and such as hee but Irenaeus nay Polycarp St. Austin and Prosper nay the Arausican Councel Bishop Abbot and Bishop Hall nay Remigius himself and the whole Church of Lyons Peter Moulin and Melancthon nay Doctor Whitaker himself His own Brethren of the upper and lower way nay Doctor Twisse and Mr. Calvin have not escaped him These are not all whom I have cited in vindication of my severity against those Doctrines which are severe against God Amongst them all there is not a Bellarmine or a Bolsec though in such a point as this is they are as fit to be heard as any others because the points debated are neither Protestant nor Popish or if they are either they are both And when the queâ—tion is whether black or white is the lighter Colour or least fit for mourning I suppose a Papists Iudgment upon that matter may be allow'd They having sense and reason and erudition as well as we Besides The Papists do cast no more upon Protestants than upon those other Papists who jump with the Calvinists in these opinions Nor do the Protestants cast more upon the Papists than upon those other Protestants who jump with the Papists in these opinions Nor do the Papists say worse of the Protestants than some Protestants do of Papists And if my Assailant knew this before I told him I wish he had considered as well as known it But not to speak of their suffrages if those unquestionable Authors whom I have cited have only beaten the precious spices as so many Confectioners merely to draw out the fragrant sent I do not envie their being beaten but am very well content that they smel as sweetly as they are able § 8. Eighthly Now I have shewed what it was upon which I fastned the charge of Blasphemy and that I could not in charity or in conscience have spoken less than I did I cannot but mark in the next place the tranâ—cendent partiality of Dâ— Reynolds who having timely perused the whole Correptory Correption before it was sent unto the Presse whilest yet it was capable of some Amendment was yet so far from blotting out those vast excesses of Rayling which his eyes beheld in every page against my person and my opinion and against every great Author who seemed to stand in his way that he rather endevour'd to prove it lawful nor only lawfull but even necessary in writings of this nature they are his own words He farther prompted him to a Text to comfort him up in his commissions And so the Correptory Corrector being an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Favourite or white Boy may be allowed to frame a charge of Atheism both Major and Minor against all that agree not to God necessitating of sin His Book may be commended as an elaborate and learned piece for calling slanderous Dragon and nooneday Devil Satanical Blasphemer an exceeder of the Devil himself in Blasphemy worse than Diabolical and a maker of God to be worse than the Devil Whereas when I did but distinguish of modest Blasphemers and such as were for Ligonem Ligonem without the naming of any person that is of such as speak God to be the Author of sin in those very broad and down-right Terms and of such as say the same thing in terms lesse Blunt I was surprised from the Presse with a chiding Preface and modestly accused of immodesty and implicitly affirmed to be of Bolsec's complexion and all this by a Person professing Friendship and Civility But now I hope he will confess that I had great and weighty Reasons to say that the Maâ—ichees and Marcioâ—ites were not so bad in their Assertions as they who teach with contention that God is the Author or cause of sin and for this I have the judgement of Irenaeus who saith that the Hereticks never durst to entertain such an opinion as should but seem to make God the Author of sin He speaks of Hereticks in general of all that were without the Church and no doubt but Carpocrates as well as Marcion was in his memory and his mind because he hath written concerning the Heresies of both Was it not better or lesse ill to make two principles coeternal the one distinctly of good the other distinctly of evil than to ascribe all evil to the God of all goodnesse ' Bate but the word Coeternal and we shall find it good Doctrine that of good and evil there are two distinct principles God of the first and Lucifer of the second Now those Hereticks not believing the liberty of the will and thereupon not understanding that without the liberty of the will of the Creature no imaginable wickedness could ever have come into the world they concluded that God must be its Author But then again considering that the very same fountain cannot yield both killing and healing water and that the best as well as worst fruit doth never grow from one Tree and that uncleannesse as well as purity could not possibly issue from the very same God they found it safer to conclude that there were two distinct Gods to be the contrary principles of good and evil than that the very same God should be the Fountain and source of both so that the Heresie of Marcion may seem to be in this respect a degree of Reformation for though he ran into a mischief extremly great yet it was with an intent to escape a greater And if it were not so as I have said why was it said by Irenaeus that the Hereticks themselves had never the boldnesse to affirm that the God of holinesse and purity was the original Fountain or Cause
wipe off the stains which his unwary Admirers are wont to fasten upon his Name whil'st instead of contending that he was sorry for his failings and intended to publish his Recantation they indeavour to justifie what he condemn'd and so the Calvinists in effect do write the most against Calvin So vast a difference there is betwixt them that are but the Followers of that Learned man and us who are his real Friends Who do not follow him where he erred through thick and thin but just as far as he follow'd Truth and as far as we hope he did intend his Retractations § 6. Whereas my Assailant is pleas'd to add that they intended no more than by multitudes of places of Scripture they were led unto referring by figures to many Texts but in words at length not naming One I have several things in answer to him First who told him that they intended no more or that places of Scripture did lead them to the speaking of what they speak 2. What Errors or Heresies have there been within Christendome which have not pretended the very same thing that multitudes of Scripture did lead them to their assertions 3. Why did he not compare one of the frightfullest speeches which I accused with any one Text of Scripture by him producible 4. Let him name for the future one place of Scripture whereby Zuinglius was led to say That God makes a man Transgressor that Adultery or Murder is the work of God the Author Mover and Impeller what places of Scripture led Smoutius Vermilius Beza Triglondius Musculus Sturmius Piscator Borrhaeus not to mention the Doctrines of Mr. Calvin Dr. Twisse Mr. Hobs and a multitude the like to say that God is the Author of evil whether of punishment or of sin that wicked men sin by the force of Gods will that God effecteth those things that are sins that his Reprobation is the cause of incurable despair that both the Elect and the Reprobates were ordained to sin Quatenns Sin that he is the cause not only of the actions but of the very defects and privations that is of the obliquities irregularities and sinfulnesses themselves Thus we see who they are whose Doctrines of irrespective and unconditional Reprobation not places of Scripture have led them to charge God with sinfull actions sins sinfulnesse metaphysically abstracted beyond which no language no tongue can speak above which no fancy no wit can reach 5. Though the wonder already is very great yet will it still be much greater if we compare one of the Texts by which they are said to be led to their Intentions of speaking thus The first Text he refers to is Gen. 45. 5 6 7 8. from which place it is evident that God is affirmed by Ioseph to be the Author of much good which his guilty Brethren never thought of but not at all of the evil which they thought against him And it will seem to me somewhat more than strange if Dr. Reynolds cannot distinguish betwixt God's permitting or suffering evil to fall out by the wills of wicked men which are free to evil and by which they are said not to be unavoidably fatally or necessarily wicked but to be voluntarily and wilfully wicked I say it is somewhat more than strange if he cannot distinguish betwixt Gods permitting that evil that he might draw good out of it and his being the Author or Cause of that Evill upon occasion of which the good is wrought Before he had resolved to give an instance from that Text he should have compared it with what went before chap. 37. where because Iacob loved Ioseph more than all his Brethren v. 4. and therefore made him a finer Coat v. 3. they hated Ioseph and could not speak peaceably unto him v. 4. but they did not hate him by the Impulse of God as Mr. Calvin at first spake nor did God urge them or smite their mindes as Dr. Twisse For the Devil and their own Flesh one or both did intice and tempt though they could not force them to hate their Brother Well Joseph dreamed a Dream which was also a Prophecy that his Brethrens sheaves should make obeisance to his v. 6 7. which dream was from God and accordingly both good and true But his brethren hated him the mor◠v. 8. which greater hatred was from the Flesh and the Devil Joseph kind to his brethren as well as obedient to his Father went to seek out his brethren from the vale of Hebron to Sichem and thence to Dothan v. 14 17. This was from God But before he came to them they conspired against him to slay him v. 18. This from the flesh and the Devil Reuben said let us not kill him shed no bloud and would fain have rid him out of their hands to deliver him again unto his Father v. 21 22. This was from God the wise and holy disposer of all that happens to his Glory But they plunder'd Ioseph of his Coat and sold his Body to the Ishmalites for 20. pieces of silver v. 23 28. This was meerly from the flesh and the Devil being not hindered but permitted by the long-suffering God to execute their wills against his own And this he suffered the rather that he might order and dispose their wicked Fact of cruelty to their innocent Brother which was also their Rebellion against the commandement and will of their patient God to many great aud good ends which never could enter into their thoughts For by the wise and holy providence of God whose excellency it is to draw good out of evil not evil out of Good Joseph was sold by the Midianites into Egypt v. 36. and aduanced in Potiphar's House c. 39. 5. and by his Interpreting of Dreams which was a gift from God and not from Satan he was so advanced from one degree to another that he was made a Father to King Pharaoh Lord of his House aud Ruler over his land ch 45. 8. This was Gods doing but no sin sure for injured Ioseph to be advanced There was a Famine in all lands over the face of the Earth ch 41. 54 56. But that was no sin Iosephs brethren went up to Egypt for a supply c. 42. 43. still no sin Joseph supplyeth them c. 45. which was charitably done and so without sin What said Ioseph of Gods oeconomy to comfort his brethren when they wept aloud and were troubled at his presence v. 2 3. He said no worse things of God than that he sent him before to preserve life aud that I hope is no sin to preserve his brethren a posterity in the Earth and to save their lives by a great deliverance who had delivered him up to be destroyed with vassalage Nor was it his si◠to requite them with so much love for their hatred with so much good for their Evil. Ioseph goes on it was not you that sent me hither but God For they sent him no whither but sold him to
Preterperfect and again the fore-sight in the Preterperfect tense with the Decree in the Preterpluperfect As if he thought that Gods Decree were before his prescience or fore-sight even in order of time and that the portions of that Creature could have place in Eternity if he did not think so he might have satisfied himself with a non aliâ ratione quam and not have added an ideo quia therefore because in the very next Section But let his ablest Followers construe his words how they will or can they must grant his Doctrin to be this That whatsoever comes to pass which God foresaw from all Eternity he did also decree from all Eternity But it was also his Doctrin that God foresaw from Eternity all the sins in the world without exception therefore it was his Doctrin that God did also decree all the sins in the world withot Exception Nor can they possibly pretend that all sins are the punishments of former sins because then they would incur one of these absurdities either that no sins are the first or that there are sins before the first and so that the first are the second and the antecedent the consequent which would imply an unexcusable contradiction They are avowedly of this judgement that there is a necessity of all events and that God doth necessitate the very first obliquity of his creatures and for that very first doth also damn them as appears by what they say of the Damnation of Infants which though sufficient of it self to shew the false application of the 38. Texts yet is it not all I am to say of my Assailant's misfortune in that Attempt For Thirdly If those places by him alleaged were not figupatively spoken that is according to the Hebraisme already mentioned but did intentionally import Gods efficiency of sin in any kind or any thing else which imports him to will it only then would they be so contradictory to all the other places of Scripture wherein no figure can be pretended that we should find it impossible to reconcile them For when God in Scripture expresseth his hatred of sin in the highest terms of Detestation and forbids it by a Law and provides against it by Threats as well as by many other means and clears himself from all aspersions which Carnal Fancies have imagin'd to his dishonour his words are so plain and their literal importance is so rational that every man as he is man doth as naturally believe it as he naturally believes there is a God And such as have learn'd to disbelieve it have not learn'd that lesson as they are men but they have learn'd it so far only as they have learn'd to be inhuman And I appeal to all the world whether when two places of Scripture do seem to clash and contradict we are not obliged to interpret the hard by the easie the euivocal by the nnivocal the harsh by the agreeable and that which according to the letter hath materiam odiosam by that which according to the letter hath materiam favorabilem It follows from all which I have said that those 38. Texts are nothing at all to the purpose for which they were alleaged by my Assailant for they amount at the most to no more than this that God doth punish mens sins by not restraining them from sinning farther which is expressed in Scripture by giving up or hardning or some other word which according to the Hebraism so often mentioned is active only in sound but permissive in signification For when God is said to punish sin with sin it is meant negative As for example because God had purged Israel and Israel was not purged therefore he would not purge them from their filthiness any more that is he would permit them to be filthy still he would not cleanse them against their wills and so we see it is explained by God himself what is meant by his punishing of sin with sin He that will be filthy and is resolved on'c and rejects the means of his purification is left by God or given up or given over to be filthy still so that the writers whom I charged with making God the Author or cause of sin were not led into those mischiefs by multitudes of Texts of holy Scripture as my Assailant hath very dogmatically but very groundlesly pretended but rather they led those Texts of Scripture which way they pleased to serve their Turns The word of God hath been ever used as a Lesbian Rule by all sorts of Hereticks who have been first preengaged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be humble servants to their opinion And when the Scripture is led by them or rather dragg'd and tortur'd to the maintaining of those Errors which they espouse they pretend to say no more than what they are led unto by Scripture And some of the people are so shallow so credulous so unexercised in reasonings or so unwilling to take the pains to consider and examin what they are taught as to swallow so dangerous and so thick a Fallacy But so far is the Scripture from leading any to say that God is the Author or Cause of sin as some much less the Necessitator and Compellor to it as others that it even compels us if we are sober to say the contrary There are indeed some figurative expressions which carnal men have profanely used but the figure in those expressions is so visible a figure that they who cannot indure to see it are fain to wink very hard There being nothing in Scripture so plain as this that as the womans faith is said to have made her whole not because it did heal her but because without it she had not been healed so God is said to have done many things not because he did or could do them but because without him they had not been done foâ— nothing can be or be done with his sufferance CHAP. VIII E. R. For my part I thus Jâ—dge That if men would candidly carry this Controversie to its Native and proper Issue it would amount to this 1. Whether the Graces of Faith Perseverance and the glory following be not God's own 2 Whether being so he may not do what he will with his own 3. If so whether he might not ab aeterno absolutely purpose in himself on whom to bestow them from whom to withold them without any Injury unto any T. P. § 1. NOW Reader observe how he displayes his strength He consideringly begins to handle the matter of main Debate Some weighty thing may here be look't for from one whose Parts and Abilities are so acknowledgedly great He now undertakes to state the Question and that by amassing together some Propositions which are not at all to the Question in hand and which being granted will not do him the least good office for it would never be thence conclusible that I have erred in any one period or that the Correptory Correptor hath justly
than by desiring my Readers Patience and his Impartiality For first admit it were so that none of those writers whom I accused had ever writtē any such thing as that God is the Author and Cause of sin Admit they had said it only in substance or by way of Consecution in terms aequivalent or tantamount as the speaking very falsely is equipollent to a Lye althought it is expressed in cleaner phrase yet If the Holy Father Irenaeus was deeply offended with Florinus for meerly seeming to make God the Author of sin If the blessed Martyr St. Polycarp an Apostolical Father upon the hearing of any word which did but sound that way would have started out of the place where he stood and have stopped his ears and have broken out upon a suddain into a passionate Ecphonésis as if a Dart or Javelin had been shot into his Eye sure my Disorder and Indignation had been excusable in case the Doctrines which I accused had only seemed so much injurious to the Spirit of Holiness meerly sounded that way If that Antient Author the very Contemporary of Austin who writ the Haeresis Praedestinatorum did worthily reckon it a sin to be but silent in such a Case such silence seeming to give Consent If the Famous Synod at Orange which my Adversaries themselves pretend to reverence did pronounce an Anathema against it and that with great sharpness to its Abettors If Nicetas did account it the frightfull'st Blaspemy of Mahomet If learned Moulin was frighted by it into the Doctrine of Arminius touching the Businesse of Reprobation which made him suffer so great a measure of Dr. Twisse his Correptory Correction If the pacifick Melancthon is often provoked out of his Patience and shews that one great end of our Saviours comming into the world was to teach us that the Devil is the Author of sin If the most moderate Hemingius doth express the Doctrine of unconditional Praedestination almost as often as he speaks of it by such disgraceful phrases as Parcarum Tabulae and Fatum Stoicum and affirms it mischievous to the maners of men as well as blasphemous against God If Remigius Lugdunensis and the greatest Favourers of Gotteschalk and Dr. Whitaker himself with our late most learned and Reverend Primate of Armagh did count it an evident and an horrible blaspeming against God to say He imposeth upon his Creatures any Necessity of sinning yet by how many and noted Men how often and how publickly hath that been said If S. Chrysostom thought it better to be ten thousand times buried than that God should hear any such word because of us If Bish. Bancroft at Hampton Court with the good liking of King James did call it a Desperate Doctrine of Praedestination from whence King James was of opinion that a desperate Presumption might be arreared by inferring the necessary Certainty of standing persisting in Grace If learned Deodate of Geneva did so much abhor the ascribing unto God the least Causality of sin as not to allow a possibility of his being so much as the occasion of it In a word If St. Austin and Prosper and divers others whom I shall mention Chapter 4. § 5. 6. 7. were as deeply concerned as I have been and much more pungent in their Expressions Then why should I have been charged in so high a Degree as I have been for having been jealous of God's Honour as well as They and equally zealous for his Glory who is my Redeemer as well as Theirs If I have met with such writers who pretending to be godly as well as learned have sent those Doctrines to be printed and left for lessons to Posterity which have not only made God to be the Author of sin even in those very words but also in all other words in which an Author can be exprest and even in many more words than can be used with any Truth of any Reprobates whatsoever whether Men or Devils whereby to charge them with the sins of such as are ensnared by their Seducements why should any Man condemn me for the natural effects of my Resentment If my Reverend Assailant may be allowed to be a publick Defender of those very Doctrines which are condemned by Holy Scripture by the publick reasō of the Church throughout all Ages and by the private reason all the world excepting the Sectaries themselves who have been the Authors or Fautors of them as destructive to the purity to the verity of the Godhead with how much a greater force of reason must I be allowed if not commanded to assert the purity of his Goodness against the daringnesses of men who carry their life in their Nostrils whose Foundatiō is in the Dust If Paul Barnabas on such an occasion would have torn their hair from off their heads Nay if a Jewish High Priest would have rent his Garment upon the hearing of any sentence reproachfully spoken against his God Nay if the Heathen man Plato would not have any one to live in a well order'd City who should say or hear with any patience any such horrible affirmations as that God doth Predestin or Decree the moral evils of his Creatures why then should a Christian be less Religious Nay if Vedelius and his Followers have affirmed those Doctrines to be so perfectly essential to Religion it self that we cannot be Advocates for God but at the peril of being Atheists how can we choose but look upon them as on the worshippers of Hermes who thought that to hurle stones at him was the godliest Instance of their Devotion Let my Reader carry in his mind from the beginning to the ending of what I have or shall publish as well for whom as against what my pleadings are And then I shall demand no other favour If He that strook at the Father did force the * Dumb Child to speak who but for that provocation had liv'd in silence it must needs be difficult for me whose provocations were so much greater to keep my self from an outcry against the Persecutors of Heaven and bold Invaders of Immortality who but for that sollicitation had never once appeared upon these subjects Fourthly I do consider I am in Duty both to God to my self and perhaps to some of my Brethren also to lay to heart the Nature of true Repentance which doth import an endeavour of Restitution and in some degree of satisfaction as well as Grief It is not enough to cry Peccavimus in our Closets or to shed some Tears behind the Door as Peter did when he repented but we must imitate St. Peter in that better effect of his Contrition his peaching publickly for Christ because he had privately deny'd him I cannot but think my self admonished by the words of Christ to St. Peter when Thou art cōverted strengthen thy Brethren Had I never been misled into the contrary opinion
am every where willing to put the fairest construction upon the words of my Assailant and not the worst that they can bear But what he meant by his Oyl and Balsom in the beginning of his attempt he hath enforced me to feel by his After-Blowes To make profession of respect not for Honesty or Truth or Ingenuity of dealing for profane polite parts of wit and learning and presently after to accuse me of injuriously fixing the Name of Blasphemy upon the Doctrines of some men whom he espouseth for their Opinions when as himself will confess upon his serious perusal of my fourth chapter I only called that Blasphemy which hath been ever so called and is acknowledged to be Blasphemy by the ablest men of that party from whose publick writings it hath been ciâ—ed This I cannot but pronounce to be a very corroding and wounding Balsam I would not for all the world be so unhappily polished with witt and learning as my Glycupcirous Assailant would make the world beleeve I am It is so far from being grateful or pleasant to me to have my head thus broken with Commendations But yet I will possesse my soul in patience I will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nay farther yet I will endeavour to take some pleasure in such afflictions which I suffer for being sensible of dishonours done unto my God When meer mortal men are pleaded for against me in revenge of my having pleaded for God himself against men when I am sullied as a Bolsec who is presumed to be of a foul complexion meerly for proving that God is Pure and that he cannot indure to behold Iniquity that he cannot away with it that his soul doth hate it that 't is a trouble unto him that he is weary to bear it that he will rather have us dye or be temporally undone than commit it in the least measure when we are able to avoid it through him that strengthens us that he will punish it with infinite and endlesse pains so far is he from decreeing that men shall inevitably commit it and suffer for it unavoidably through the necessitation of such Decree when I am defamed by no unplausible man as very scandalously erroneous meerly for saying in effect what St. Paul said before me Let God be true and every man a liar and every man a Blasphemous liar who shall say in contradiction to the true word of God that God is the Willer Ordainer Predestiner Decreer Necessitator Author and Cause of Sin When I say I am a sufferer for not enduring or suffering such things as these to seduce the People without controul by making them Libertines and Atheists at least in practice if not in judgement and as far as they have power or opportunity subverters of Government and razers out of the distinction 'twixt Right and Wrong which is the Foundation and the Cement of all Civil society I will endeavour to rejoyce in such my sufferings And sure in this present case of my being thus assaulted by Dr. Reynolds I need not take any thought as to my personal concernment For § 3. Thirdly He hath used me no otherwise than he hath used the very Truth which he commends and persecutes in the very same breath I say he commends her in that Rule of Aristotle That truth is preferrable to all other Friends But then he persecutes her too by giving thanks and commendations even to that very Lictor who gave to truth rather than me such store of Correptory Correption And by styling that signal volume no less than an Elaborate and learned Answer which was so full of the most groundlesse and the most palpable Inventions It is not my Accusation but the observation of the people That Mr. Barlee's papers are gone abroad with the concurrence and approbation of Dr. Reynolds And this partaking with the Erroneous must pass for friendship to the Truth because a Text out of Aristotle is misapplyed to make it good The youngest birds peradventure may be caught with such chaff till they are warned to coÌ„sider That never any man yet hath so contended for an error as not at least to pretend a friendly praeference of the Truth Truth hath many great flatterers but few true friends To give her very good words is cheap and easie But whether it is truth or specious error which my Reverend Adversary doth here prefer our Impartiall Reader will best discover by the following parts of his Epistle CHAP. II. E. R. I was sorry to see this controversie revived amongst which caused antiently so much Trouble to the Church of God in our memory so much Danger Distemper to the Belgick Nation whereof King James was so sensible that in a letter to the States he calleth Arminius an Enemy of God chargeth Bertius with grosly living against the Church of England in avowing that the Heresies contained in his blasphemous Book of the Apostacy of the Saints they are the Kings own words were agreeable with the Religion and profession of this Church and he did solemnly desire the Embassadours of that state to forwarn them from him to beware of the Disciples of Arminius of whom though himself lately dead he had left too many behind him T. P. § 1. IT seems the Authority of King Iames is of great weight with him And since it hath made it his own choise to imbue his Reader in the first place with the judgements and censures of that wise King I am heartily glad to find it is so For although that King in his younger years had imbibed and suckt in even before he was aware that Presbyterian opinion of the genevizing Scotish Kirk which no man living will think strange who knows the place of his Birth and his Education yet in his riper and wiser years he found so great reason to retract and abjure his former error that he readily accepted of Bishop Mountagues appeal and commanded it to be printed and to be dedicated also to his royal self when even this was the Doctrine appealed for That the children of God may fall away according to the Tenor of our sixteenth Article which saith that After we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart from Grace given and fall into sin and by the Grace of God we may rise again and amend our lives Which the King perceiving to be the words and mind of the Church of England and that Bertius had discerned it a great deal sooner than himself he did not think it below him to grow in Knowledge and Wisdom as well as years To forsake an error repent is an ingenuous and valiant as well as pious nay farther a glorious and Princely thing Therefore Melancthon was not ashamed to write against that opinion which he had formerly been of And my contemptible self till I was Master of Arts of half a years standing was as fully if not as fiercely of Dr.
bound himself to this constant method or indeed that he ever useth it at all Whereas I have shewed on the other side both that the other method is possible and farther that God is pleas'd to use it and hath chosen to make it a principal part of the message for which his Son was sent unto the world even to publish that method that men might know it comply with it depend apon it and not deceive and destroy themselves by giddily fancying any other And for this I have produced a very evident passage of Scripture and shall produce many more as occasion serves I will not run out into greater length by insisting on his acknowledgment of a natural indifferency in the will of man for which I had Correptory Correption though I never spake of it Nor will I prosecute his use of the word Invincible by asking whether he means irresistible or not of which Paraeus did seem to be ashamed in those papers which he sent unto the Synod at Dort when he was threescore and ten years old I will only leave one thing to my opponents consideration to be compared by him with the present manner of his reasoning God may give us the ability to fast without eating as many dayes and nights as Moses or Elias He may also if he is pleased make our victuals to encrease in the very eating by such a power as he shew'd in the Widow 's Cruse 1 King 17. 14 16. He may feed us and cloath us like the Birds and the Lillies by the same omnipotency by which he said Let there be light and there was light He may convert us as he did Paul with equal power and expedition or as the Thief upon the Cross when we have only time left to cry peccavi to think a good thought and to make a short Ejaculation though that either of these two was irresistibly converted we have no reason to imagine For God to do those greater things doth not imply a contradiction and therefore he may do them by that omnipotency which could give the Creature a Being out of Nothing but what of this We cannot prove from hence that these are the Courses which God doth ordinarily use or that he useth them once in a thousand yeares and if we should thus argue we should but teach men to tempt their Maker and to ruine themselves by their Security It will be much more profitable to admonish the Reader in this place I speak of the unlearned and unconsidering Reader of the several wayes of Gods working with his several Creatures in proportion to the Natures which he hath given them He worketh one way with Natural Agents as we proverbially call the irrational Creatures but with voluntary Agents he useth another way of working We have an example of the former in that necessitating Omnipotence whereby he sayd unto the Sun stand still in Gibeon we have examples of the later in those compassionate wishings revealed to us in his word O that there were such an heart in them that they would fear me and keep all my Commandements alwaies that it might be well with them and with their Children for ever O that they were wise that they understood this that they would consider their latter end These and all other wayes whereby God works upon the wills of Men are such as are congruous and agreeable to the nature of a will or rational Appetite as by enlightning the Understanding and by perswading the will and by inclining the affections by strengthening the hopes and the fears of the voluntary Agent by the proposing of promises and denouncing of Threats by Exhortations and Dehortations and all other such means as are congruous to the nature of rational Creatures and for that very reason they cannot be irresistible like those other operations whereby God doth necessitate his natural Agents The whole may easily be discerned by all that shall read and consider Ier. 5. 22. 23. Where God complains of his Israel for not fearing Him and for not trembling at his presence who had placed the sand for the Bound of the Sea by a perpetual decree that it cannot pass it To which absolute will of the Omnipotent the Sea is obedient of necessity but his People sayd God hath a revolting and a rebellious heart they are revolted and gone Which passage of Scripture doth plainly teach us that the consideration of that power which God had shewed in his ruling the Sea was sufficient to move his People Israel to fear and tremble at his presence but it teacheth us also as plainly that it is not the same way of working by which he ruleth the Sea and by which he ruleth the wills of Men. He ruleth the Sea as the Sea but Men as Men and the wills of Men as the wills of Men. It was therefore a stronge Adventure in my Reverend Assailant to infer and argue from Gods Omnipotency that he doth those things which are incongruous both to the Nature of his Creature and to the rules of his working which it pleased his Wisdom to set himself And having said thus much by way of admonition to the more unskilful unwary Reader I now proceed from the fourth Question of my Assailant which consisting fallaciously of three hath occasioned this length unto the fifth general Question by him proposed CHAP. IX E. R. Whether the Lord hath not been pleased so to reveal in the Scripture the doctrine of his Decrees touching his purpose of glorifying himself in a way of mercy and justice as that there shall be an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the Creature to stop at and to adore that he will not have his councels fathomable by the shallow line of humane reason but when he doth with his Creature as the Potter with his Clay of the same common and equal Lump choose one part unto honour and leave another unto dishonour his purpose be not that we should acknowledge and adore his Soveraignty and lay our hands on our mouth as amazed at the unsearchablenes of his Iudgements now certainly in all this there is no blasphemy God doth permit sin and what ever he doth he doth by the councel of his own will therefore he did ab aeterno decree to permit it For otherwise he could by cōfirming grace have hindred and prevented the committing of it as well in all Angels as in some as well in Adam as in Angels and that without any violence offered to their nature at all Gen. 20. 5. Gen. 31. 7. 1 Cor. 10. 13. Neither can there be given any Cause out of God himself and the Councel of his own will leading and inducing him rather to permit then hinder it He did decree to permit it in order to his own Glory which is the supreme end and therefore by him absolutely willed because the being thereof by his unsearchable wisedom and power was ordainable thereunto He may out of that common equal Mass wherein he did