commits such an Act or if he doth sin that the fault is to be transferred upon God who is the first Cause of that Act. By the way before we proceed further Let me ask you one Question Can a man a Viz. under the same influx and assistance do any more good than he doth or omit any more evill than he b That is whether he can be guilty either of omission or commission and upon what account omitteth I know you are clearly for the Affirmative But that will hardly stand with M. Hickmans Metaphysicks for I argue thus and first for good works He that can do more good than he doth can do some good that God doth not produce in him the consequence is apparent because he is supposed to do allready all that God produceth in him But man cannot do some good that God doth not produce in him for every good is a reall being and every reall being or reall positive modification of beings is from God and produced by him saith M. Hâ—ckman Thus for good Then for evill That man cannot omit more evil than he omitteth according to M. Hickmans Metaphysicks I prove thus He that can neither omit the Act to which the evil of sin adhereth nor avoid the obliquity of that Act which is the sinfulnesse of it He can omit no more evil than he omitteth the consequence is evident But a man can neither omit the Act nor avoid the obliquity Therefore c. He cannot omit the Act for that is of Gods production nor avoid the obliquity for that is either to be done by some other Act or without it If by some other Act that is not in his power for every Act is from God and 't is absurd to say it may be done without it If Master Hickman holds the negative of that Question the Brittish Divines of the Synod are against him and a world of absurdities do follow that opinion viz. That a man cannot bury his Talent nor receive the grace of God in vain nor be idle and neglect the great Salvation nor watch nor fast nor pray nor do any one good duty more then he doth nay that he can do no duty properly so called nor sin at all if he be thus chaind by a Fatall necessity to every Action and omission And then what will become of the word of exhortation and the power of Godlinesse But let us follow Master Hickman a little in that instance of Hating God †Pag. 90. This saith he is Complexum quid and must not be spoken of as if it were one the vitall action or hatred is a thing positive and consequently he grants that is from God but the undue referring or terminating of that Act to such an object to God which is altogether lovely that saith he is the sinfulnesse of the Action But whence is this derived He saith pag. 75. onely from mans corruption and the Devils temptation But what is mans corruption is it not his vitiosity yet he saith pag. 97. where the cause it self is vitious its vitiosity is not the cause of the vitiosity of the effect for vitiosity of it self neither can effect nor be effected And for the temptation of the Devil is not that an Act if it be then it is from God for every Act is from him saith M. Hickman If he saith the malice of the temptation is from the Devil I demand what is that malice of the Devil Is it not his vitiosity and then as before where the cause is vitious its vitiosity is not the cause of the vitiosity of the effect for vitiosity it self neither can effect nor be effected what then the vitious cause saith he taking together the being and the supervenient privation is the cause of the vitious effect taking it in like manner for the being and the super added privation But I say again the being whether mans or the Devils doth not act according to Master Hickmans Metaphysicks for every Act is from God and produced by him and consequently 't is the Act of God that gives the corruption of man and the malice of the Devil their life and vigour and how then can God be freed from being the Cause or Author of the sin Besides in the hating of God there is not onely the Act of hatred which he confesseth to be positive and so from God but there is also the turning of the will in this Act and the undue determination of it upon God the object altogether lovely wherein consists the sinfulnesse of the Action as he confesseth I demand then is not this determination of the will an Act If it be which I presume cannot with any shew of reason be denyed then whose Act is it and from whom If he saith from man himself his best course is to whisper this assertion as softly as he can else I must tell him in his own language p. 96 97. he and I both were best not to make too much noise lest we should awaken the youngsters to fall aboard us with such an Argument as this If man be the efficient Cause either of a good action or a bad action then he doth effect it by another action and so we may proceed in infinitum Well for fear of these dangerous Bugbears we will for once ascribe it unto God So that God is made the cause of that hatred and of determining the will upon this lovely Object which is God Now if we should impannell a Jury of honest men to inquire who is the Cause or Author of this sin of hating God in this case who would they finde guilty think ye Doctor Molin saith In Anat. c. 13. parag 10. Quod si Deus insontem creaturam destinavit ad perditionem necesse est eandem destinaverit ad peccatum sine quo non potest esse justa perditio sic Deus erit causa impulsiva peccati Nec homo poterit juste puniri ob peccatum ad quod est aut praecise destinatus aut Dei voluntate compulsus If his destinating men to sinne makes him the impulsive cause of sinne how can he produce in them the Act that is sinfull and determine their wills unto it and yet not be the Cause of the sinne Let us put a Case for illustration Suppose a Prince should make a Law injoyning his subjects to write none but perfect Italian Characters and then should take the hand of a child to write with and the Characters prove Bastard Roman or Secretary or suppose one should take a dead mans hand and forge a Deed with it * Such a case hath been and a Triall upon it too and the dead hand acquitted by the Jury Though the Subtilty of Master Hickmans Metaphysicks should finde the childe guilty and distinguish the Forgery upon the dead body yet without all peradventure an honest Jury would bring in a better verdict If it be objected that these are no competent instances because there is no vitall
Ptinciple in the one nor power to resist in the other and what else is to be alleaged I cannot imagine it is to be remembred that according to this Doctrine the will of man in sinning is full as much acted by Allmighty God as the hand of the child and dead man in those instances are by those who make use of them respectively That is the will is merely passive and how can it be otherwise For every Act is from God and if God useth the will to this Act of sinning how can the will avoid it Should the will resist Gods motion when he does Act it That is impossible 1. Because that Motion according to the Doctrine of the Calvinists is omnipotent and insuperable 2. Because to resist is to act and every Act is from God and produced by him And now we see how little reason Master Hickman had to sleight and reject the Answer which Gregory de Valent and Bradwardine give to that Objection from the hating of God as he doth pag. 89 90. I recite not their words saith he because I need not their help and because they seem to make impossible hypotheses as if the hatred of God were produced by God in a stone whereas it cannot be that there should be the hatred of God in a stone which neither hath nor can have any knowledge The stone is like to be the less miserable for wanting this capacitie But how much doth Master Hickman make man better He allows him a will and understanding I suppose but no more use of these faculties is ascribed to man by his Metaphysicks than to a stone For to use them is to Act them and Act them a man cannot because he can produce no action without another action and so in infinitum and then the youngsters will fall aboard us again If Master Hickman will not see these absurdities and what reproach falls upon the Holinesse of Almighty God by this Doctrine yet Master Baxter doth consider and sufficiently censure it for he saith in his Call to the Unconverted pag. 229. Some are so loth to think that God can make a self-determining creature that they dare not deny him that which they take to be his prerogative to be the determiner of the will in every sin as the first efficient immediate Physicall cause And many could be content to acquit God from so much causing †Mark that word of evil if they could but reconcile it with his being the chief cause of good as if truths must be no longer truths then we are able to see them in their perfect order and coherence because our ravelled wits cannot set them right together nor assign each truth its proper place we presume to conclude that some truth must be cast away This is the fruit saith he of proud self-conceitedness when men receive not Gods truth as a childe his lesson in a holy submission to the omniscience of our Teacher but as Censurers that are too wise to learn I hope Master Hickman will become at least M. Baxters Proselyte especially if he considers how impossible it is that his Doctrine should hold good in reference to the first sin of the first Angel that fell from God For I argue thus The Materiality of that first sinfull Act granted to be from God from whence will he derive the formality or irregularity which is the sinfulnesse of it Was it from the Angels own Corruption or the Malice of his Tempter this could not possibly be for he had neither Therefore it must either be from God and then God is the Cause and Authour of that sin or else from the self-determination of his own will and then if that determination be an Act we have at last found an Act whereof God is not the first immediate Physicall cause What can Master Hickman say to this Truely he seems very fairely to grant it if I be able to understand him whether this be out of inadvertency or conviction I determine not But in contradiction to what he had said before he saith Pag. 97. Suppose the first sin of Angels to have been a proud desire to be equall unto God the cause of this proud desire was the will of the Angel but it was the Cause of the action in such a sense as a causality may be said to have a Cause Per se of the vitiosity of the action it was onely the Cause Per accidens per concomitantiam Thus far M. Hickman And now as Poelenburg saith of Doctor Twisse In confut Disp inaugur Fred. Span. that being affrighted partly by his insolent asperity and partly by the tedious prolixity of his Volumes he would not undertake him wholely but satisfie himself with a Confutation of that one Argument whereof his Confidence boasted that the Devil and his Angels were not able to Answer it and by his performance in that the Judicious Reader might judge what returns might be made to the rest if any man would give himself the Leisure and trouble to attempt it So shall I resolve concerning M. Hickman though neither the strength of his Arguments nor the length of his Discourse be very formidable yet there is so much asperity in his style which brings no advantage at all to the Cause he undertakes to manage as deterrs me from a further procedure in the examination of his Pretensions What is already done is sufficient to evince that his Armour is not inchanted or impenetrable nor his weapons mortall But such is his provocation he must expect a sharper assault when it shall be seasonable from a hand that will strike home and lose no advantage to defeat him being guided by an eye so piercing that it discovers every posture that layes his weaknesse open and exposes him unguarded to the mercy of his Adversary Sir If you would be kept upright you must not suffer your self to be led by them who could never keep their own judgements steady in these Controversies After your recourse to God and the Holy Scriptures you will finde Primitive Antiquity your best Directory and the nearer you approach the fountain head the purer you may be confident to find the stream you drink at But if you come down to S. Austin so many Adversaries had padled and troubled and spil'd the waters of his Cistern that he could scarce see his own face in it For instance in that one Question Whether the truly Regenerate may totally fall away and perish Master Baxter is very confident he was for the Affirmative †Account of Persever p. 5. c. and calls them immodest that deny it yet M. Calamy * His Serm. at the E. of Warwicks Funerall p. 19. c. tells us this learned Brothers evidence is all slur'd and made invalid by Bishop Abbot and that there is in S. Austins writings sufficient proof to the contrary It may conduce something to ones settlement to consider seriously how many of the most Learned and judicious Heads these
consideration If in any part of the Christian world these opinions be established as their Doctrine you will easily grant it is likelyest to be in the Belgick Churches for the settling of whose distractions about these points that Synod of Dort was Assembled But do you think these are propounded as Articles of their Creed there or accounted currant Pulpit-Doctrine among them You must not believe it For now adayes how many are there that dare tell them out of that Place God will not have All men to be saved and the greater part of mankind are Reprobated by Gods absolute Decree or that Christ did not die for all men or that God calls those whom he would not in any wise should come to him or that the Elect as they are called cannot by any no not the most grievous sins be removed from their Election Insanire credas eum qui jam haec dogmata pro concione ausit defendere saith a Learned person * Arnold Poelenb ubi supra in Ep. dedicat imployed amongst them you may very well conclude the man is not sound in his brain not well in his wits that takes the boldnesse to maintain these Points in his Sermon And if any person lesse discreet and provident hath exposed the Arcana or Secrets of that his Doctrine naked to the understanding of the people illico magna animorum perturbatio existit there follows presently such a great Commotion and disturbance in their minds as looks like the Praeface to a new Schisme which thing saith that Reverend Person Ibid. we remember to have fall'n out in this very town of Horn where we now exercise our Sacred Ministeriall Function This Sir I hope will be sufficient Antidote to allay and cure the Palpitation of your heart though it had beaten a great deal thicker upon M. Hickmans suggestion that his Quinquarticular opinions were the Doctrine of the Church of England And for the other branch of his discourse you may acquiesce in a confidence that Master P. never intended to assert a positivity of every sin not of sins of omission to be sure But he is of age to answer for himself Yet since you presse me for my sense of Master H. Metaphysicall Divinity you shall have something towards it I am not satisfied that his distinctions to avoid the Possibility of sin are sufficient to avoid the making God the Author of it For thus he saith †Edit the first pag. 91. Because it belongs to the Universality of the first cause to produce not onely every reall being but also the reall positive Modifications of beings therefore we say that in good works both the works themselves and their rectitude are positive and are from God in evill works there are also two things considerable the works themselves and their pravitie the works themselves we doubt not are positive and from God as all other positive things are but their pravities adde no new entities to them but consist in a mere privation Thus Master Hickman In reference to sinfull Actions others deliver the distinction in these termes telling us The sinfull Act is to be considered either Materialiter as to the matter of it and so it is from God and of his production or else Formaliter as to the Form of it and so it is from man But we should remember that many times the Materiall Act as we may say cannot be disjoyned from the formall and in that case why he that is the Cause of the one should not be adjudged the Cause of the other is a Question that requires a solid determination If God produced the Act of eating the forbidden fruit materially why not formally too seeing that sin consisted wholly in the eating of that fruit for Adam could not eat thereof without sin And if God by an Omnipotent concurse determined Davids lying with Bathsheba will that distinction mend the matter Will the matter of that foul Act tend to the praise of Gods efficiency when he tells us †See 2 Sam. 12.12 with Num. 15.30 the Form of it conduced so signally to his dishonour If the Act which is evill ex genere objecto be materially of Gods production why should we invest man with the formality of it which is the sin Is it because the Act is repugnant to the Law of God to which man stands obliged 1 Joh. 3.4 and the transgression of this law is sinne This seems to be Master Hickmans sense pag. 91. In those things which are to be done according to a Rule good consists in a conformity to and convenience with the Rule but evill in a difformitie or discrepance from the Rule But I say that Act of Adultery cannot be materially committed but it must unavoidably be discrepant to the Law of God so that if God produceth this Act materially it is impossible man should give it any formality but what is sinfull especially seeing this formality or sinfulnesse doth of necessity result from the materiall Act. Indeed were there no Law in force about it it were possible to conceive how he that produceth that which we now call the Act of sin materially should not for all that be the formall cause of it But the law being now made and that by God himself too what Subterfuge can be invented to avoid it but that God who is affirmed to produce the Act should be accounted the Author of the sinne But God made the Law you will say not to bind himself but to regulate his Creature Though this be true yet it doth not take away the objection for how can it stand with the justice of God first to make a Law to regulate his creature and then to impell and Act that creature contrary to that Law and at last to punish the same Creature for being so Acted and impeld Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right Gen. 18.26 God will be justified when he judgeth a Psal 51.4 and therefore when he comes to execute judgement upon all b Epist Jud. vers 15. he will convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed not which himself hath Acted them unto or Acted in them But Master Hickman perhaps will stick still to his Metaphysicall formality and say here is in the supposed Act a discrepance or opposition to the Rule which is the Law of God To this the answer is very easie that man seldome or never entertains sin or consent to it with a design or minde to oppose himself to the divine Law but for the most part to enjoy his pleasure and satisfie his Appetites Besides if he should consent to sin with such a set purpose to oppose Gods Law yet we must grant according to Master Hickmans Doctrine that that Consent and that purpose being reall positive Entities Acts of the Humane Soul are from God and of his production whence it follows still either that man doth not sin when he
followers might be accurately examined and determined of by the Rule of Gods Word onely the true Doctrine established and the false rejected and concord peace and tranquillity by Gods blessing restored to the Churches of the Low-Countries This was the end of their Convention But what opinions were they that gave the Scandall to Arminius and his followers Were they not those of the rigid Calvinists and who were the Authors of that disturbance but those petulant Parsons that would not endure the Prescription of the wise Physitian nor suffer their Soars and Ulcers to be lanced 'T is true The weakest must to the wall and when 't is put to the Question Who they are that trouble Israel to be sâ—â— the Oppressor will have the casting voice But if the Character inserted in the Margin be true Illi scilicet Religionis ergô alii ministeriis suis aincti alii prescripti relegati extorres c. Nempe Hillenius Alcmariâ c. Tu quoque aliique tui similes aut libellis infames aut concionibus tribunitiis Conventiculis schismate seditione ac rebellione adversus Illust Ordd. Decreta ac Magistratuum Edicta insignes Hos tu totidem quasi religionis ac professionis vestrae Martyres habe in Canonem refer non invideo nec vehementer nego si quidem ista est religio Populum mendaciis splendidis decipere ac dementatum in Pastores ac Superiores suos concitare in alienas Ecclesias ac Ministeria involare quod tu de Samuele Antipa Borriis vesiris agnoscis Loca publica per vim occupare Clausira publico sigillo munita effringere Senatui vim inferre Ordd. Edicta atque Interdicta palà m violare omnia turbare Haec dum vobis impunè licent Superiorum sive indulgentia sive metu jam istos videre est precarium in vos imperium trahere At si hâc non succedit via si eorundem authoritate toties laesâ ista maledicendi ac malefaciendi libido vestra coercetur ferocitas comprimitur tuique unius vel alterius exemplo alii deterrentur sisiuntur ut verbo dicam cuneus cuneo pellitur tum verò vos audire est vim ac persecutionem quam aliis intentâstis quiritantes Martyria vestra praedicare Grevinch Absiersio Caelumn Adr. Smoutii pag. 42. which Grevinchovius hath given of them I shall referre it to the judgement of the Reader whether it doth not more then a little resemble a Disturber both of Church and State But the impartiall Synod is Assembled and upon the invocation of Gods holy name bound by Oath that they would hold the Sacred Scripture as the onely rule of their verdict and demeane themselves in the hearing and determining of this cause with a good and upright Conscience Act. Syn. ubi supra And in the Frontispice of every Chapter of the Decrees or Canons they insert this Title A Rejection of the Errors wherewith the Churches of the Low Countries have now a long time been troubled Would not any man expect upon so solemne an undertaking especially having made it their method as well to reject such Errors as to assert their own Doctrine that those should be rejected amongst the rest that teach Reprobation to be decreed in order of nature before Creation The greatest part of mankinde to be created to destruction That by the force of Gods irresistible Decree it is impossible but Man should sin That whatsoever comes to passe whether good or evill does come to passe by the force of Gods irresistible Decree That Mans wickednesse is not the cause of God's will of abandoning man to hell but on the contrary that God's will is the cause of that wickednesse That 't is not absurd to say that it may be a capitall sinne to do the true and primary will of God That seeing Adam is the cause of sinne and God the cause of Adam how it can be that God should not be the cause of sin That God doth incite lead draw command impell harden deceive men unto wicked actions and effect sins that are most enormous Such horrid and blasphemous opinions as these are frequent in the Writings of Calvin Beza Piscator Martyr and many others and yet herein we have altum Silentium these Doctrines never troubled those Churches nor the tender Consciences of this Synod They are so good friends with these Opinions they never disturb their peace at all 3. This is not all when Bogerman the President of the Synod had entertained but a suspicion that the Remonstrants would detect the enormitie of these opinions and the shamefull errors that had been broached by those so admired Names forgetting his solemn Oath to lay all prejudice and affection aside and examine all matters to be debated according to the onely rule of God's word he fell into so great an agony of Passion that it was discernible in his very eyes and countenance as if they had touched the very apple of his eye Yet the Synod obliged by the conscience of the same oath never gave him the least rebuke or check for this palpable indication of Partiality as the perspicacious Author of that Judicious Antidotum †Bone De. us quam vehementer afficiebat ipsum levissima talis suspicio qui viri oculi quis vultus quis ardor animi quartae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Antidotum p. 31 hath observed and put upon record for us Ibid. p. 32. 4. When Maccovius Professor of Franequer in Freisland had not onely asserted and disseminated by his Writings the most horrid opinion of all that ever had been written about Predestination by Zuinglius and Piscator and moreover in the very Synod undertook against his Colleague Sibrandus Lubbertus to maintain that God wills sinne that he ordains men to sinne as it is sinne that God in no wise would have all men to be saved and many things of the like import declaring openly that if these things were not maintained they must forsake their chief Doctors who had taught those things and fall in to the opinion of the Remonstrants What said the Synod to this bold Supra-Creatarian Did they sequester or displace him No but accounted him for a pure Orthodox Divine guilty neither of heresie nor erroneous doctrine as it was declared by the publick testimony of the Synod and so they dismissed him with a wholesome and friendly Caution to forbear such forms of speech as might give offence to tender eares and could not be digested by persons ignorant and uncapable of so great mysteries and that he would not set light by those distinctions of Divines who had deserved well of the Church of Christ 5. That which is beyond all exception we finde in the very Acts of the Synod Sess 107. Act. Syn. Nat. Dord 233. part 1. That Gomarus declared publickly that he could not approve of the Judgement of those Belgick Professors concerning the object of Predestination that he thought they must determine Man to be
when they Rest from their duties Rev. 14.13 and reign as kings in the possession of eternall blisse The excellency of their goodnesse consists in a perfect voluntary Conformity to the chief Good with a full satisfaction and acquiescence in the fruition of it with out that imperfection of a liberty to do otherwise Upon our arrival in heaven and our immediate approximation unto God when we shall be like him and see him as he is in Glory we shall then Will Good as the blessed Saints and Angels do most voluntarily yet not of freedome but necessity But to doe this is the Prerogative of our Nature in highest state of Exaltation by way of reward upon the consummation of her duty which is free obedience and never properly performed unlesse by speciall dispensation if any such be granted but when we have it in our own power and choice to do otherwise But this contemplation hath transported me beyond my bounds All that is desired of Master Baxter is this that he will allow that praise which the most wise God gives unto men for their good duties may be as Rationall as Man's Thanksgiving for the benefit of the Divine Grace and then his objection will amount to nothing But as long as he continues so eager in a palpation and flattery of his own Reason He must expect to meet with some Adversary that will be no lesse zealous in a just vindication of Gods wisdome But let us attend to the case he puts for Tilenus to answer which is ushered in with a If and an interrogatory after this manner 3. If his offence be at Gods preterition of men without a foresight of their demerit as taught by the Synod To interrupt your Period I suppose this is a matter to take offence at and to carry a just indignation against too For Donteclock and Molinaeus say it chargeth God with unjustice Molin Anatom Armin cap. 13 pag. 84. For it cannot consist with Gods Justice Si homo innocens nullam ob culpam destinaretur ad desertionem ex qua aeterna perditio necessario consequeretur If a man innocent and for no fault should be destin'd to desertion from whence of necessity his eternall perdition followeth He addeth another Reason Parag. 10. If God hath destined his creature to perdition it is necessary that he should have destinated it to sin too without which that perdition cannot be just and so God shall be the impulsive cause of sin Nor can man be justly punished for that sin unto which he is either precisely destined or compelled by the will of God And Parag. 6. He flies higher and saith By this kind of Reprobation the Innocent creature is not onely made most miserable but also most wicked For if God doth first hate man the work of his own hands it cannot be but that man must needs hate him again and so God by this opinion is made the Author of sin and mans hatred of God This Opinion therefore even in the Judgement of Molinaeus to whom the Synod gives so great commendations amongst their Acts †Part. 1. p. 300. does justly give offence to all Readers that are tender of the honour of Divine Justice But saith M. Baxter it is not their Doctrine true or false but his Tilenus forgery yea it seems contrary to their Doctrine You say right M. Baxter it seems contrary to their Doctrine and they and you are much beholding to your seemings But Multa videntur quae non sunt and so doth this Was it rejected as a troublesome Doctrine to those Churches wherein it was so fiercely maintained Let the Reader remember if Master Baxter will not what the Contest was betwixt Maccovius and Lubbertus mentioned above Let him also reflect upon the Publick Profession of Gomarus in the open Synod let him read again his Definition of Reprobation fore-cited There were many Creabilitarians as well as Gomarus who made the creature in its condition of Possibility to be the object of the Decree And these Spirits were too Mercuriall to have been fixt to a subscription of those Canons or Decrees of the Synod if any Syllable had been found in them which they could not easily by the benefit of some few distinctions have reconciled to their Supralapsarian Doctrine These are none of Tilenus's forgeries Master Baxter by which what ever their Doctrine seems to you for Perit judicium cum res transit in affectum it will be evident to the impartiall Reader that the Major Part to which the rest subscribed thought it a thing indifferent Act. Synod Dor. part 2. pag. 34. f. Sir Judic Gomari de Reprob part 3. p. 24. Th. 2 6 7. and so the Deputies of the Synod of South Holland expresse themselves as was alleadgcd above Whether Gods Preterition of men were in foresight of their demerit or without it If as you say of Gods regard to faith and obedience in reference to election so you affirm he had regard in his Preterition to mens demerit 1. as the necessary fruit or effect of that Preterition or Reprobation ◠as the condition upon which he decreed to damn them I grant in this sense 't is their unanimous Doctrine that in his Preterition God had a regard to it and a foresight of it But indeed saith M. Baxter they well how well is referred to the Readers judgement affirme that there was the same sin and demerit therefore no regard to faith and obedience in Tilenus's sense in many whom yet God Decreed to convert and save They say so but there is so much equivocation and Artifice in their sayings that we see the Supralapsarians concluded they might Subscribe to it without Prejudice to their own opinions Master Baxter proceeds thus 4. If his offence be that they think that God doth not effectually convert and save all the rest of the world if he be a Christian he believes the same himself or if he be not one Part of it may be seen If you had Practically learned what that of our Saviour meaneth Mat. 7.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you would have weeded this last clause out of your discourse before you had charged Tilenus with Perverse Insinuations But Tilenus will take no offence at this neither is he offended that God doth not effectually convert and save all the rest of the world no nor yet that he doth not give to all Grace that is immediately sufficient to faith in Christ and to salvation But his offence is that you teach God hath rejected farre the greater part of mankinde not-willing to save them nor to give Christ to die for them nor to conferre any saving benefit upon them by the help whereof they might convert themselves no not when he doth seriously and with open armes invite sollicite and even with prayers and supplications exhort them to be converted and save themselves from perdition but to have decreed that infinite Myriads of men faln by divine punishment inflicted for
certain Law the transgression whereof is Tyranny but he doth it jure dominii as an Absolute Lord whose Soveraignty is without Law or controll and therefore he may dispose of them at his pleasure That this is their sense notwithstanding what they publickly professe to detest may easily be collected from the 18. Art of the 1. Chap. Of Predestination where to stop the mouthes as they pretend of such as murmur at the grace of free Election and severity of just Reprobation as they call it they alleage that of the Apostle Rom. 9.20 O man who art thou that replyest against God And that of our Saviour Mat. 10.15 Is it not Lawfull for me to do what I will with my own Texts of Scripture which the Creabilitarian-Supralapsarians as well as the Existentialists make use of for proof of their Decrees and they are just as much to their purpose that is altogether impertinent to the use those severall Parties do make of them Amongst those Doctrines which the Synod doth purposely disown and publickly professe to detest there is another which I wonder Master Baxter hath omitted which is this That this Doctrine of the Calvinists maketh God the Author of sin But perhaps he hath smelt out the Fallacy exprest in the Fifth Article of the first Chapter where they say Incrodulitatis istius ut omnium aliorum peccatorum causa seu culpa neutiquam est in Deo sed in homine The cause or fault of unbelief as of all other sins is in no wise in God but in man Here are two words made use of as of the same importance Causa seu culpa Cause or fault by which while many of their Doctors do affirme that God doth incite and irritate urge and impell necesitate and constraine men to sin nay worketh sin in them yet shall they be excused from prevaricating the Doctrine of the Synod for though to speak properly God be the cause of sin by such manner of working to the production of it yet Culpa the fault of sin can in no wise be ascribed to him Zuinglius and Keckerman have given the Reason of it because there is no law made to bind Almighty God to the contrary but man onely For confirmation hereof they adde Sicut Taurus cum nunc has nanc illas vaceas promiscua vaga Venere init adulterii culpa non tenetur sed homo si cum aliorum uxoribus rem habeat eo quod huic non illi prohibens lex lata fit ita Deus peccato seu culpa non tenetur cum creaturam ad hos illos actus movet sed tantummodo creatura ipsa quia ei lex prohibens lata est non Deo I shall not so much as English it for shame I cannot leave Master Baxter till I have followed him to the very last stage of his Preface which he shuts up thus We should live in peace if the advise of the Synod ibid. were followed A Phrasibus denique iis omnibus abstineant quae praescriptos nobis genuini Sanctarum Scripturarum sensus limites excedunt protervis sophistis justam ansam praebere possint doctrinam Ecclesiarum Reformâ—tarum sugillandi aut calumniandi But the Synod should have done well to have left us an example herein by their own practice But we find that when the British Hassien and Bremish Divines moved to have the harsh and incommodious speeches of some of their Doctors declared against and rejected they were out-voted and cried down upon this account Ne Phrasium istarum rejectione Orthodoxa doctrina ab illis asserta defensa paritèr damnari videretur Session 13â— We may see by this it is a great deal easier to give good advise than to follow it And this appears further by that Admonition of Master Baxter in the next words And if withall we were humbly Conscious of our own frailty and fallibility and could maintain that unfeigned charity to our Brethren which beseemeth all the Disciples of Christ and which would cause us to say and do by others even in our Controversall writings and private Speeches of them as we would have them say and do by us But alas the Disciples of that Synod will neither be persuaded to be the first nor do the last they will follow none of these Prescriptions no not so much as Singular M. Baxter †Physician heal thy self witnesse his proceedings against A Table of Decrees of Salvation Damnnation Ye shall live therefore ye shall mortifie the deeds of the Body Ye shall die therefore ye shall live after the Flesh Delineated by Mr. W. Perkins In his Armilla Aurea Predestination Creation Election The Fall Reprobation Supralapsarian Creabilitarians Supral Existentialists Sublapsarians Suprulap Creabilitar Sup Existent Sublapsarians God's Love in Christ towards the Elect Effectuall Calling Justification Sanctification Glorification Eternall Life The Word Softning Faith Remission Imputation Mortification Vivification Repentance New Obedience CHRIST the Mediator His Holinesse Obedience Death Buriall Dominion of the grave Resurrection Ascension Session Intercession Illumination Repentance Faith Tast Zeale Deception of Sinne. Obduration Malice Vnbeliefe Apostacy Calling Vneffectual Agnition of that Call Relapse Gad's hatred towards the Reprobate No Calling Ignorance Blindnesse Reprobate Sense Greedinesse in sinning Pollution Damnation Death Eternall Death Judgment Declaration of Mercie Declaration of Justice GOD's GLORY Place this at Page 411 M. Perkins his Synopsis or Table In Armilla Aurea shewing according to his account the Series of Causes both of Salvation and Damnation or the Decrees of Election and Reprobation with the Means and Order of their Execution BEcause this Table contains an Ocular demonstration of the matter of Fact charged upon the Calvinists and their Synod by Tilenus I thought it convenient to insert it and to make some Reflexions and Observations upon it for the benefit of the Reader who upon a view of this Diagram may take notice with me 1. That there are three severall Sects contending as well against one another as against the Remonstrants They are usually divided into two Parties Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians But because Supralapsarians are of two sorts I shall distinguish them by severall Names The first sort who make the creature Gomar disp de Praedest 1604. thes 13. not in its Actuall existence but in its condition of Possibility the Obâ—ect of the Decree These I shall call Supralapsarian Creabilitarians The second sort who make the creature in its Actuall Existence but yet Innocent the Object of that Decree These I shall call Supralapsarian-Existentialists The third sort who make mankinde faln in Adam and by Divine imputation guilty of Originall sin the Object of the said Decree These are called Sublapsarians * Piscator indeavours to reconcile all three opinions Considerationes illa non sunt opposiâ—ae sed tantùm diversae ac proinde omnes locum habere possunt sicut revera habent Objectum praedestinationis esse hominem consideratum ut nondum
conditum ut conditum sed adhuc integrum ut lapsum peccatoque corruptum Idem Tract de Gratia Dei pag. 173. c. Cap. 1. Artic. 7. And although these severall Parties differ hugely in fixing the Object of the Decree yet there is no considerable difference amongst them touching the means and manner of carrying it on from the Fall of Adam to the Finall Execution of it Of which the Synods Canonicall Declaration is this That Election is the unchangeable purpose of God by which before the foundation of the world according to the most free pleasure of his will and of his mere Grace out of all mankind fallen through their own fault †So they call Adams sin from their first integrity into sin and destruction he hath chosen in Christ unto salvation a set number of certain men neither better nor more worthy then others but lying in the common misery with others which Christ also from all eternity he appointed the Mediatour and Head of all the Elect and foundation of salvation and so he Decreed to give them to him to be saved and by his Word and Spirit effectually to call and draw them to a Communion with Him that is to give them a true faith in him to justifie sanctifie and finally glorifie them being mightily kept in the communion of his Son to the demonstration of his mercy and praise of the riches of his glorious grace They say Ibid. Art 15. Moreover the holy Scripture herein chiefly manifests and commends unto us this eternall and free grace of our Election in that it further witnesseth that not all men are elected but some Not-elected or passed over in Gods eternall Election whom doubtlesse God in his most free most just unreproveable and unchangeable good-pleasure hath decreed to leave in the common misery whereinto by their own †That is Adam's fall default they precipitated themselves and not to bestow saving faith and the grace of conversion upon them but leaving them in their own wayes and under just judgement at last to condemn and everlastingly punish them not onely for their unbeliefe but also for their own a Is their own fault even now mentioned any of them sins to the manifestation of his Justice And this is the Decree of Reprobation which in no wise makes God the Author †Artic. 5. They say Cause or Fault of sin c. of sin a thing blasphemous once to conceive but a Fearfull unreproveable and Just Judge and Revenger Thus farre the Synod 2. Observe That according to this Order of Causes the Apostles Doctrine is inverted for he saith If ye live after the flesh ye shall die but if ye through the Spirit do mortifie the deeds of the body Rom. 8.13 ye shall live But on the contrary here the Doctrine runs thus Ye shall live therefore ye shall mortifie Or Ye shall die therefore ye shall live after the flesh For sin is acknowledged to be the fruit and effect Norton ubi supra pag. 52. or as others who speak more nicely and warily an infallible Consequent of the Decree 3. By this Table Almighty God is supposed to have loved a certain number of persons with an unchangeable love and so dearly as freely to have elected them to enjoy a communion with himself in joyes and glories everlasting and that before Christ is given to be a Mediator for them which doth much Eclipse if not quite evacuate the merit and satisfaction of Christ For to be chosen to such salvation is to be in Gods highest favour and then what room is there for the intervention of Christs Merits and the price of his bloud to satisfie Divine Justice appease Gods wrath to make an atonement and procure a Reconciliation This will help to establish at least to countenance the Socinian Doctrine who take advantage of that opinion to argue against the satisfaction of our Saviour after this manner They who are no longer under wrath but in Gods Grace and favour they have no need nay they cannot by the death of Christ be delivered from wrath and restored to Gods favour But those whom God loves unto eternall salvation are no longer under wrath but in Gods favour Therefore there is no need nay they cannot be delivered from wrath and restored to Gods favour by the Death of Christ 4. That Christ is appointed a Mediator onely for the benefit of these Elect to die for them and procure salvation for them whose salvation was as sure before as the Decree and love of God could make it 5. That Faith Sanctification and Obedience are not considered in this Decree as qualifications in the person to be elected but are provided to be brought in by it to dresse him up for Glory 6. That those Elect Persons in their appointed time shall be called so infrustrably and irresistibly that it is not in their power to make it void or hinder it 7. That no sin can put them out of that road Series or File of means drawn by the Divine Decree to lead them from Election to Glory No not their foulest or filthiest sins Hereupon Master Perkins reckons it amongst the Priviledges which waite upon their Adoption Armilla Aurea cap. 37. Hinc etiam multis Privilegiis donantur saith he They are indowed with many Priviledges 1. They are heirs of God 2. Coheires with Christ and Kings 3. All their afflictions their failings also and falls tantum sunt castigationes paternae ad bonum illorum they are nothing but fatherly chastisements designed for their Good And such is the Judgement of the Divines of Drent Par. 3. pag. 275. f. inserted amongst the Acts of the Synod Whereas say they the Remonstrants do maintain that the faithfull may fall from Grace there are a thousand Testimonies of Scripture against it And presently after We will adde but one Testimony more It is said Rom. 8.28 That all shall work together for good to them that love God If all the evills wherewith they are chastized then their very sins also Quae peccata quemadmodum in impiis interdum habent rationem poenae Sic etiam ipsissima peccata etiam in fidelibus habent rationem paternae castigationis Which sins as in the wicked they have sometimes the nature of punishment so the very self same sins also in the faithfull have the nature of Fatherly correction And may not God be the Author of them then seeing all evill of punishment is from him Amos 3.6 8. From hence it undeniably follows that the sins of these Elect must be of another rank and of a far different nature from the very same sins for kind and quality of the Reprobate For example the Adultery Sedition Murder Oppression of the Reprobates do shut them out of Gods favour and kingdome 1. Cor. 6.9 Gal. 5.19 But the same sins for nature and kinde in these Elect their Adultery Sedition Oppression Murder cannot shut them out either of Gods
Lordship not of his justice If the Assembly of Divines came any lower yet not so low as the Sublapsarian way For they say Confess of Faith ch 3. th 3. By the Decree of God for the manifestation of his Glory some men and Angels are Predestinated unto everlasting life and others fore-ordained to everlasting death By ranking Men and Angels in the same Decree it is evident they conclude men to be Elected and Reprobate antecedently to the fall of Adam which appears more fully by comparing the 6. and 7. Theses of that Chapter with this third The Calvinists that speak most warily doe yet maintain an Absolute and irrespective Decree not as to the end but as to the means Dr Kendal De Doct. Neopel oratio habita in Comit. Oxonii p. 36. Asserimus Decretum Absolutum quod nullum Motivum ut loquuntur admittat ex parte Dei We assert an absolute Decree because it admits of no Motive on Gods part Non negamus fidem conditionem esse salutis Asserimus vero fidem dari absque omni conditione Similiter de damnatione philosophari solemus Non negamus impoenitentiam finalem esse conditionem damnationis Asserimus vero Deum absolutè decrevisse reprobos omnes impoenitentiae suae permittendos fidem verò in Electis omnipotenti Gratia suo tempore creandam We do not deny faith to be the condition of salvation But we affirme that faith is given without any condition In like manner also we are wont to speak concerning damnation we do not deny finall impenitency to be the condition of damnation But we affirm God absolutely decreed to permit all Reprobates to their own impenitency but to create faith in his own time in the Elect by his omnipotent Grace And a little after Decretum illud irrespectivum non est de salute sed side nec de instigendis poenis sed non concedendâ Poenitentiâ That irrespective Decree 〈◊〉 not such as to salvation but as to faith nor as to the infliction of punishment but as to the non-concession of repentance As well Sublapsarians as Supralapsarians of both forts though they frame a Decree that suspends the benefit of salvation upon a condition yet it makes that condition absolutely irrepudiable and irresistible as to some persons and absolutely impossible unto others and so takes away the proper nature of sin and duty and by consequence saves and damns respectively without them 2. If we consider the Article of Redemption by Christ however M. Baxter finds an Universality of it in the decisions of that Synod yet Doctor Thomas Hill Master of Trinity Colledge in Cambridge and able sure to understand a piece of Latin as well as Master Baxter could find no such matter For to signifie his esteem of that Assembly he calls it a happy remedy against Arminianisme in his Epistle to the Christian Reader before Master Fenners Willfull Impenitency a. 3. yet two pages after he breaks out into this Lamentation But alas Arminius now appears amongst us not so much in the Schools and Pulpits as in popular meetings For as Zanchius complained with much regret of the Sulteran I suppose it should be Lutheran Ubiquitaries that he found them ubique every where to vex and molest him so may we grieve O that we could with brokennesse of heart bewaile it that our Universalists are almost universally spread amongst us It is gotten into our Netherlands much into the Fennish and Moorish parts of this Kingdome yea amongst many people that love Jesus Christ and therefore entertain it as conceiving it most for his Honour the more are they to be pitied c. Thus Doctor Hill who certainly did not think his happy Remedy to be infected with that he accounts disease and so much bewailes as if it were as mortall as he conceived it Epidemicall Good God! That mans eye should be so evil because God is so good and gracious That he should think it a matter of humiliation and that with brokennesse of heart that the Name of the Lord Jesus and the Merits of his Death and the emanations of his Grace should be so much magnified And yet we finde the whole Assembly of Divines if we may collect their Judgement out of their Publick Confession rather then take it from what a single member it seems hath whispered into M. Baxter's eare had so narrow a Faith they could not admit this Point to be an Article of their Belief For they speak restrictively of Christs Sacrifice Chap. 8. th 5. that it hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father and purchased not onely reconciliation but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdome of Heaven for all those whom the Father hath given unto him And more fully thes 8. To all those for whom Christ hath purchased Redemption He doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same making intercession for them c. And this is very probably collected out of the third Chapter too comparing the 6. and 7. Theses together They who are Elected being fallen in Adam are redeemed by Christ The rest of mankinde God was pleased according to the unsearchable counsil of his own will whereby he extendeth or with-holdeth mercy as he pleaseth for the glory of his not Justice but NB. Soveraign Power over his creatures to passe by and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin to the praise of his glorious justice ˙ ˙ Besides Master Baxter hath had some contest as I remember with Adversaries who make the remission of sins the immediate effect of Christs death and maintain that it is granted unto the elect before they do Actually believe I suppose Master Baxter will not say these men are for universall Redemption though perhaps as great Admirers of the Synod as himself and I doubt these are not a very few 3. As touching the unavoidable necessity of all humane Actions in regard of the effectuall Decree that the Calvinists do commonly maintain it is evident That I may not tire the Reader with a multitude of testimonies I shall satisfie my self with one or two The first cause so concurreth as it determineth the second cause in its operation saith M. Norton This is readily granted in naturall Agents in free-rationall Agents it is proved thus If the futurition of the operation of the second Cause is determined by the Decree of God then the operation is self is determined by the efficiency of God The Orthodox Evangelist p. 110. m. And a little after If as often as the will doth not will it therefore doth not will because God hath not determined that it should will then as often as it willeth any thing it therefore willeth because God hath determined that it should will But as often as the Will doth not will it therefore doth not will because God hath not determined that it should will Therefore p. 126. f. Notwithstanding sin is wholly of man and subordinate efficiency in sinfull actions belongs formally unto the
you do not sit down with satisfaction herein I shall conclude in your own words to Master Warner of Justification pag. 314. It is not replying that will serve the turne but either prejudice will hold them to the side that they have taken or else they will think him in the right that hath the last word but usually they will go with the Party that is in greatest credit or hath most interest in them or advantage on them But 3. you upbraid them with unconscionable dealings unworthy falsification perverse insinuation and upon this threefold Cord it is that you suspend your belief towards them But can you discover such moats in the Remonstrants eyes which how many soever your Multiplying Glasse or indisposed Medium presented to you are by this time washed out of Tilenus's and can you not see the Beams that are lodged in the eyes of your own Party Do they stand at too near a distance for you to behold them If you will promise to suspend your faith here too upon the discovery of such beams I will be so charitably officious as to direct you to a Prospect whence you may take a full view of them If you have seen Festus Hommius who was one of the Scribes of the Synod his Specimen Controversiarum Belgicarum you might have seen enough of such dealings as you unjustly charge Tilenus with as is sufficiently discovered in two little Pamphlets the one bearing this Title Joan. Wtenbogardi Responsio ad ea quae illi speciatim impegit Festus Hommius the other this Optima Fides Festi Hommii c. Of this Man and his Brother Scribe Doctor Damman the Author of that Antidotum Pag. 11. writeth thus To whom is the falshood of these men unknown Festi sc Hommii in edendis pro arbitrio suo truncandis atque interpretandis Trelcatiorum Scriptis non sine magnorum virorum gravissima indignatione Similiter in propolandis pessimâ fide Episcopii Disputationibus privatis c. And of Bogerman President of the Synod He saith thus An non ille est cui ô justa Nemesis ◠artes fraudes mendacia sua quibus titulis ille innoxios insontes Remonstrantes in Synodo Ib. pag. 10. suopte arbitratu injussus praeter omnem rationem oneratos ac gravatos tantâ cum acerbitate amarulentia dimittebat ut poenitentia tactus veniam sibi posteà petendam indicaret adeoque ambitio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 palam publicéque exprobrata in os objecta sunt quòd vid. c. But alas these are Peccadillo's not worthy Master Baxter's taking notice of we will therefore bring him to a Mount which will afford him a notable Prospect indeed whence he shall descry the Reputation of the Innocent Remonstrants bleeding under the stroaks of such objected forgeries and Calumnies Hactenus Remonstrantibus saith the same Author Pag. 23. ferè crimini datumtest quod malâ fide sententiam contra Remonstrantium proponerent atque exprimerent dici vix potest quot convitia dirae ac probra propterea passim contra Remonstrantes in foris pulpitis circulis conviviis scaphis rhedis curribus triviisque hominum dicta ac projecta fuerint tanquam in falsi manifestos fide omni indignos Mortales Ipsa Synodus Arnhemiensis O rem foedam ac detestandam quis credidisset ausa est sententiam illam quam Remonstrantes ipsissimam ac genuinam Contra-Remonstrantium sententiam esse asserebant tanquam foedam atque impiam sub vocabulorum quorundam homonymiâ aequivocatione communibus calculis damnare eâ tantum de causa ut falsum dixisse Remonstrantes crederetur atque ita publici odii victimae fierent But to bring the Prospect a little nearer to Master Baxters ken Was there no such Artifice used in the Synod of Dort What say they in their fourth Rejection upon the First Chapter of Divine Predestination They reject the errour of those who teach that in the Election unto faith this Condition is formerly required viz. That a man use the light of Reason aright that he be honest lowly humble and disposed unto life eternall as though in some sort Election depended on these things Is not here an insinuation as if the Remonstrants held this Doctrine the designe of the Synod being to declare against them yet say the Remonstrants this is falsly and by way of Calumny thrown upon them for the Contrary appears as clear in their writings as the light at noon day a Ibid. p. 72. In the sixth Rejection they reject those who teach that not all election unto salvation is unchangeable but that some which are elected the Decree of God notwithstanding may perish and for ever do perish The Synod herein doth adulterate pervert and traduce the Doctrine of the Remonstrants by odious expressions Ibid. p. 76. That last branch that the elect may perish eternally the Decree of God notwithstanding is without cause thrown upon them and against their judgements For the first they ever professe Election and the will of God to be immutable Indeed when they say so they make the subject about which Election is exercised to be the faithfull man as such Hence it comes to passe when that man who believes to day turnes Infidell to morrow there is no change in Gods Election but in the man onely The Reason is because God will not chuse the unfaithfull but the faithfull And therefore when the faithfull man becomes unfaithfull the will of God concerning the Election of faithfull men remains uniform and the same But the truth is if the will of God or the Divine Election concerning that man now become unfaithfull should persevere then the will of God should properly be changed because he should will to elect unto salvation not onely the faithfull men but the unfaithfull also In the Seventh Rejection the Remonstrants complain that they of the Synod have cloathed a most certain truth with some rough invented Phrases to make it odious and look ugly Ibid. p. 77. The Errour rejected is That in this life there is no fruit no sense no certainty of immutable election unto glory but upon condition contingent and mutable But the Remonstrants professe they have not these words in all their writings They know no fruit more sweet to a pious man then what grows upon the consideration of Gods unchangeable love whereby he will most assuredly conferre eternall life upon believers As for that opinion which some place so much of their comfort in that he who doth once truly believe may be alwaies certain of his being in the faith and Grace of God however he pollutes or behaves himselfe this is a fruit which indeed they cannot relish growing onely upon that tree of Election which by whomsoever it was planted hath no sound root in Scripture In their Ninth Rejection the Synod doth covertly insinuate to make them odious that the Remonstrants teach That the cause why God sends the Gospel
this Grace was not any quality or motion determining the will by a Physicall or irresistible operation for if it had been such they whom Christ so bitterly reproved and threatned for Non-conversion had been infallibly converted This Grace therefore did but impower and bringing the matter to their choice assist and solicite them morally to embrace it which solicitation and assistance they obstinately rejected when they had it in their power and at their liberty freely to cooperate with it to their effectuall conversion Our Saviour gives us another Emphaticall Instance in the men of Nineve Mat. 12.41 where he tells the Scribes and Pharisees The men of Nineve shall rise in Judgement with this generation and shall condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonas and behold a greater than Jonas is here How was our Saviour greater than Jonas in respect of his person or office onely and not also in respect of the efficacy of his Ministery He was full of Grace Psal 45. had the words of eternall life taught with Authority John 1. Grace came by him Was Jonas a better Preacher than our Saviour Did a more efficacious Grace of the Spirit accompany his Ministery than did that of the Son of God who came from heaven to seek and to save that which was Lost by calling them to repentance The horrour that follows the conception of such a blasphemy will not suffer any sober Christian bosome to entertain it Yet the men of Nineve repented at the preaching of Jonas But that generation did not repent at the Sermons of the Son of God Was this through any defect in Christs Dispensations No The administration of Grace here by him was more abundant than that of Jonas The fault therefore lay in their abuse of their power and liberty in opposing new contumacy and obstacles to these more Gracious Dispensations To this purpose Prosper writeth expresly lib. 2. De vocat Gent. c. 26. The Grace of God saith he is principally preeminent in all our Righteousnesses persuading us by exhortations moving us by examples terrifying us with dangers inciting us by miracles giving understanding inspiring Counsil and inlightening the heart it self and imbruring it with affections of faith but the will of man is also subjoyned and conjoyned to it which is excited by the foresaid helps to this end that it may cooperate to the Divine work in it self that it may begin to exercise toward the attainment of rewards ad meritum what through the power of the supernall seed it conceived towards an endeavour ad studium having it from its own mutability if it fails from the help of grace if it proceeds Which help is applyed to All by innumerable wayes whether hidden or manifest and that it is rejected of many is their own wicked fault but that it is received of many is both of the divine grace and mans will I shall shut up this with an Instance out of Fulgentius In libr. de Praedest Grat. c. 15. framing a comparison betwixt Nebuchadonosor and Pharao he saith In respect of their nature they were both men in respect of their Dignitie they were both Kings in respect of the Cause they both kept the people of God in Captivity in respect of their punishment they were both chastised and admonished by the rod of Clemency What was it therefore that made their ends to be so different but this that one sensible of Gods hand bewailed the memory of his own iniquity the other fought against the most mercifull truth of God by his own free-will But all this will not serve Master Baxters turne though he contradicts the faith of Primitive Antiquity and overthrows not onely mans naturall liberty and way of working but likewise all the commands and exhortations comminations and promises of Holy Scripture he will not be satisfied without Gods irresistible attingencie of the will to apply and determine it to the very Consent or Act of willing which is that we are now to take into examination But to attain Master Baxters meaning may be a matter of some difficulty he doth say and unsay so often which makes many not to regard at all what he saith For Physicall Predetermination he denyes it in this Preface and in his Sermon of Judgement he saith Section 5. That God doth determine all Actions Answer to the 23 and 24. excuses mihi pag. 242 243. Naturall and Free as the first Efficient Physicall immediate Cause or else nothing could Act This Principle he saith is most likely to be false And that the wil is necessarily and infallibly determined by the Practicall Understanding which is unresistibly necessitated by objects and therefore whatever Act is done by my understanding or will is necessitated and I cannot help it And that Liberty is but the Acting of the Faculty agreeably to its nature And it was God as Creator that gave Adam his Faculties and God by providentiall dispose that Presented all Objects to him by which his understanding and so his will were unavoidably necessitated This saith M. Baxter is of the same nature with the former Ibid. uncertain if not certainly false Were this true for ought we can see it would lay all the sin and misery of this world on God as the unresistible necessary Cause which because we know infallibly to be false we have no reason to take such principles to be true which inferre it I wish Master Baxter had kept himself alwayes of this minde and then he had saved me all this labour But a little after he tells his Reader There are other wayes of Determining the Will which yet he mentions not But in his first Assize Sermon he saith Pag 9. Christ hath undertaken himself to be a Physitian to the world who are now Morally dead in sin though naturally alive to cure all that will come to him and take him so to be and trust him and obey him in the Application of his medicines He hath erected an Hospitall his Church to this end and commanded all to come into this Ark. Those that are far distant he first Commandeth to come nearer and those that are near he inviteth to come in Too many do refuse and perish in their refusall And your doctrine declare they cannot do otherwise He will not suffer all to do so but mercifully boweth the wills of his Elect and by an insuperable powerfull drawing Compells them to come in So that we have an insuperable compulsory determination And yet in his foresaid Sermon of Judgement He tels us Vbi supra The will of man in its very Dominion doth bear Gods Image It is a self Determining Power though it be byassed by Habits and needs a Guide If a Guide would serve Master Baxters turne we are content to allow him out not an Ignis fatuus but a Lantern that doth direct the understanding infallibly and besides this a reall influx that after the manner of a Physicall Cause inclines
with a distinction betwixt Reprobation and Praedamnation or Predestination to damnation For they say it is one thing to Predestinate and create to damnation another thing to Praedestinate and create to destruction Damnation being the sentence of a Judge must be past in consideration of sin but Destruction may be the Act of a Soveraign and so inflicted by Right of Dominion as was shewed above To this purpose those Deputies Ibid. pag. 35. m. De Causa Reprobationis do conclude Causam adaequatam cur Deus aliquos non eligendo Praeterierit esse solum divinae voluntatis beneplacitum That the Adaequate cause why God doth passe-by some is the sole beneplaciture of his Divine will Causam verò cur eosdem damnare decreverit esse non tantum actualem oblatae gratiae divinae rejectionem sed etiam alia omnia peccata tam Originalia quam actualia But the cause why he decreed to condemn them is not onely the rejection of the divine grace but also all other sinnes as well the Originall as Actuall Besides the Synod in those their Decrees where they thought it most plausible to fix Predestination upon the fall of Adam they confesse God did not reprobate the most part of the world without all respect of sin because they suppose all mankind infected with that corruption and stain of Originall sin in and with Adam and God cannot but behold it because nothing is concealed from his eye but they never confesse that God had respect to sin as the impulsive or Meritorious cause for which he did reprobate and ordain any to the torments of hell For they say if God had been moved by sin to passe the Act of Reprobation He had reprobated All without exception because All had sinned in Adam Again when they say God did not do this without respect of ANY sinne they confesse it may be granted that he had some respect to some kind of sin to that of Adam committed more then five thousand years agoe without the consent or knowledge of those who are reprobated and to that Originall sin that doth follow from that first sin by unavoidable necessity but they do not say he had respect to any Personall sin or sins committed freely and with a deliberate will of those who are reprobated I say according to their Doctrine God had no respect to any such personall sins Infidelity and Impenitency unlesse it were for the introduction of them by an efficacious permission as means connected with the end in the same Decree for the infrustrable execution of it And therefore the Deputies forementioned Vbi supra do reject it as an Errour in those that hold Causam cur Deus aliquos rejecerit esse infidelitatem impoenitentiam praevisam That impenitencie and unbelief are the cause why God rejects men And the very Decrees of the Synod affirm as much For Cap. 1. Reject 8. they Reject it as an Errour in those who teach that God out of his mere just will hath not decreed to leave any man in the fall of Adam and common state of sin and damnation But suppose the Synod did grant as their very nice and wary distinction absque omni ullius Peccati respectu makes it more than Probable they did not that God in mans Reprobation had some respect to his Actuall Personall sin yet if that sin be such as those Reprobates could not possibly avoid the whole matter will be reduced at last to the respect of that onely sinne of Adam And thus the Synod hath determined Cap. 3 4. Art 3. That All men are conceived in sin and born the children of wrath untoward to all good tending to salvation forward to evil dead in sins slaves to sin and neither Will nor Can without the Grace of the Holy Ghost regenerating them set straight their own crooked nature no nor so much as dispose themselves to the amending of it So that if the Synod had granted a respect of personall sins in the Reprobation of men yet they had understood no other sins than such as had been unavoidable to those Reprobates For they say those Reprobates want the Grace of Gods regenerating Spirit that they may avoid sin and they say also God hath Decreed not to give it them whence it follows that they cannot possibly avoid those sins but through the strength of that first sin and corruption which they lie under when they are commanded by the word of the Gospel to repent and believe will they nill they they shall fall into those foul sins of Infidelity disobedience impenitency and the like as necessarily as a mill-stone falls downward by its own weight for which inevitable sins notwithstanding they should be said to be praeordained to the eternall and horrible torments of hell And then if God ordained the sin of Adam and made that necessary and unavoidable too as Danaeus †Adaâ—um Dei consilio ordinatione necessariò lapsum esse and Piscator and others do positively averre and the Synod hath no where rejected it that I can remember the Reprobation of the most part of the world will be reduced undeniably to the mere will of God * Deum Adamo legem dedisse ut eam transgrederetur c. Sententia Perkinsii nostrorumque Theologorum haec est lapsum illum evenisse Dei voluntate transeunte in rem permissam h. e. Deum voluisse ut Adamus Laberetur D. Twiss in vind Grat. L. 2. p. 1. Sect. 2. c. 12. vigr 3. p. 142. col 2. what ever publick Profession they have made to detest it A fourth Doctrine which the Synod doth purposely disown and publickly professe to detest is That Reprobation is the cause of Infidelity and Impiety in the same manner as Election is the fountain and cause of Faith and Piety That sin follows the Decree of Reprobation by an unavoidable necessity is the expresse affirmation not onely of Piscator Zanchy c. But of many Synodists also Reprobationem tria consequuntur privatio gratiae peccata poenae peccatorum saith Gomarus Disp de Praedest Resp Otten There are three things which follow Reprobation the deniall of Grace Sinne and the Punishment of Sin And that they do follow it as the fruits of it is the affirmation of Festus Hommius †Thesaur Catech. pag. 216. Fructus Reprobationis sunt desertio vel privatio gratiae Dei mediorum induratio c. The fruits of Reprobation are desertion or the deprivation of Gods grace and means sufficient and necessary induration c. And the Divines of Wedderau do confesse that a necessity of sin doth follow from the Decree of Reprobation De 3 4. Art in Corol. p. 134. par 2 And this is the Doctrine of the whole Synod in their Canons for they say man cannot but sin without Gods regenerating Grace which he hath Decreed to deny or deprive them of as was shewed above Even Master Baxter himself doth acknowledge and professe that
from what fountain they issued finds in his opinion uncharitable passage and these induced him to resolve if he were put to it to prefer that Option Be not angry Sir if I put S. James his question to you upon this occasion Are you not then partiall in your self and become a judge of evill thoughts Jam. 2.4 For you are clean contrary to God in judgement He judgeth the person by the works you judge the works by the person The bitterest expressions that fall from your Dissenting Brethren you can have this excuse for We are united in Christ Disput of Right to Sacram in the Preface and in hearty love to one another We are so far agreed that we do without scruple professe our selves of the same Faith and Church And if any salt be mingled in our writings which is usuall in Disputes which are not lifelesse it is intended rather to season then to free or to bite that which each one takes to be an errour rather then the man that holdeth it And thus on both sides those that erre and those that have the truth do shew that errour is the thing which they detest and would disclaim it if they saw it and that Truth is it which they love and are zealous for it so farre as they know it Sir a little of this candor or charity would have made a better construction of those passages in Master Pierce his book at least to alleviate your censure than what you put upon it But the judgements of some men are so byassed towards the Party they have espoused that what they account but veniall or infirmitie if not laudable in them shall be censured as damnable in those against whom they set themselves in opposition To this purpose I find an observation so pertinent in that profound Doctor D. Thomas Jackson B. 10. of his Comment on the Creed pag. 3181. that I cannot forbear to transcribe it for the benefit of the Reader The Turks saith he being ignorant or not considering that there is an Immutable goodnesse precedent to the Act or exercise of Gods will A Goodnesse whereof his will however considered is no cause For it is coeternall to his will to his wisdome and Essence they fall into grosly absurd errours And consequently unto this their ignorance or to the common errour that all things are good onely because God willeth them they sometimes highly commend and sometimes deeply discommend the self same practises for quality and circumstances with as great vehemency of zeal and spirit and with as fair protestations of obedience in all things to Gods will as any other men do For Selimus to attempt the deposition of his Father was in their Divinity a good and godly Act. For Bajazet to take Arms against his Brother was an abominable impiety What was the reason Selimus his attempt sound good successe for he prevailed against his Father and this was an argument that it was Gods will that he should so do But Bajazet miscarries in his attempt against his Brother and his disaster was a proof sufficient that God was displeased with his attempt it was not his will that he should prosper And seeing his will is the onely Rule of Goodnesse seeing he did predestinate these two Princes as he did Jacob and Esau the one to a good end the other to an evill the self same Fact or attempt was good in the one but wicked in the other We all condemn it as an errour in the Turk for measuring the difference between good and evill by the event But even this errour hath an Originall which is worse They therefore measure all good and evil by the event because they ascribe all Events without exception to the irresistible will of God and think that nothing can fall out otherwise than it doth because every thing is irresistibly appointed by Gods will which in their Divinity is such a necessary Cause of Causes and by Consequence of all Effects as the Author †M. Burton of the said Epistle would have it to be Whosoever he be whether Jew Turk or Christian which thinks that all events are so irresistibly decreed by God that none can fall out otherwise then they do must of necessity grant either that there is no morall evill under the Sun or that Gods will which is the Cause of Causes is the onely cause of such evill But is the like sinne or errour expresly to be found in Israel Do any make the same Fact for nature quality and substance to be no sin in one man and yet a sin in another or to be a little sin in one men and a grievous out-crying sin in another Though they do not avouch this of Rebellious attempts against Prince and State or of other like publick Facts cognoscible by humane Laws yet the Principles of Predestination commonly held by them and the Turk draw them to the like inconveniences in transforming the immutable Rule of Goodnesse into the Similitude of their partiall affections in other cases The Adultery and Murder which David committed had been grievous sins in another man but in David being predestinated they were but sins of infirmity sins by which the outward man was defiled not the inward man Such a sin was incest in Lot Such are all the sins committed by the Elect. Thus farre Doctor Jackson And this is as like Master Baxters doctrine as if that great Prophetick spirit had been in his very bosome at the writing of those passages For saith Master Baxter The sinne of Peter David c. was exceedingly in regard of manner ends concomitants c. different from the like Fact in a gracelesse man And two Sections after In his Preface Sect. 18 materially more heinous Sect. 20. Men thus habituated to Godlinesse never live in a course of willfull sin though elsewhere †Disput Sacram pag. 331. he saith How long Asa or Solomon sin'd we know not Nor can any man possibly determine justly how long a man may live in the practise of such a sin and yet have true speciall Grace and a state of Justification nor have any one sin which for Ends concomitants and all is such as that of unsanctified men What I do the Godly mans Relations extenuate his Commissions Is his sin lesse because his light and Gods love towards him have been greater The more indeerements he hath received the more is his ingratitude heighten'd and the more incouragements have been conferr'd to continue him in his allegeance the more execrable is his Apostasie and Rebellion and all those sweet and gracious experiences of Gods favour which he hath injoyed by his perversity are raised up to be Aggravations of his crime But Master Baxter having considered too That as it is a greater measure of spirituall refining and purity that is promised and justly expected under the Gospel so a greater measure must be looked after by every man in himself and by the Guides of the Church in
the will to Act But he must have such a one as doth controull and Determine the will to Act and Operate notwithstanding the Dominion over its own Acts which he seems to ascribe to it which we think not onely unnecessary but in the ordinary course of Gods providence very absurd inconvenient and of dangerous Consequence to be affirmed 1. That it is unnecessary is evident by Gods complaint Isa 5.4 Judge I pray you between me and my vinyard what could I have done more to my vinyard that I have not done to it Wherefore when I looked that it should bring forth grapes brought it forth wilde grapes That God administred all things necessary and sufficient not in Master Baxters sense of sufficiencie which is unsufficient to this effect appears by his expectation of grapes of good workes for the All-wise God doth not he cannot expect to gather grapes of thorns or figgs of thistles and to expect conversion and good works from them who have not grace necessary and sufficient to their production is as unreasonable as to expect a Bird should fly without wings or a man goe without leggs But here was no determining Grace administred for then they would have been infallibly converted and have brought forth good works Therefore such Determining Grace is not necessary 2. As it is unnecessary so it is inconvenient For 1. it overthrowes that Dominion which by Master Baxters own confession the will hath over its own Acts and destroyes its Connatural manner of working For it puts a necessity in order of Nature and Causality Antecedent to the Act of the will so that all Praerequisites put in order the will hath not a simultaneous power that may be reduced into Act to Act otherwise or a power to want that operation to which it is so determined which takes away the liberty of the will quoad exercitium in regard of the exercise of it 2. It destroyes the proper nature of duty for a Duty is a work perform'd conformably to a command for his Authority sake who doth command it that giving proof of our free obedience we may avoid the Penalty and gain a Right to the Reward upon which the Command is established This cannot be agreeable to the nature of that work to which God doth irresistbly determine the will for 1. though the work be conformable to his command yet it cannot be properly said to be done because of his Authority but because he doth insuperably determine it 2. The doer or rather the sufferer gives no proof of his free obedience because he cannot do otherwise 3. This can procure him no right to the reward because it is not thank-worthy as the Phrase is 1 Pet. 2.19.20 beeing no part of a free obedience And 4. upon what Title can it free a man from punishment For we see God doth over-rule such as become the Rod of his anger Isa 10.5 6 12. and directeth them to do his work according to his Secret which the Calvinists account his onely proper will and yet when that work is done he casteth the Rod into the Fire But M. Baxters Determining Grace hath the Doctrine of the Synod to justifie it in making Faith and Conversion Repentance or Regeneration for the termes are promiscuously used here no part of mans work or duty For the Synod saith That Regeneration c. is a work for the mightinesse thereof not inferiour to the Creation of the world or raising up the dead quam Deus sine nobis 〈…〉 4. de Convers Art 12. in nobis operatur which God without us worketh in us and they say that Faith whereby we are first converted Ibid. Art 14 Reject 6. and from which we are styled Faithfull is really inspired and infused into the will Ibid. Reject 8. and that God in regenerating a man doth employ the strength of his Omnipotency powerfully and infallibly to bow and bend his will to Faith and Conversion And in this work saith M. Baxter * Of Saving Faith pag. 20. the Spirit is as the Hand the Object and Word as the Seal the Act of impression on the Intellect is first in Order of nature and so upon the Will the impressed Act and Habit immediately are effected by it Is this Faith and Conversion thus wrought Gods or mans It may be called Mans in regard of the Possession of it after it be wrought but in regard of the efficiency the production is so meerly a piece of New Creation that it can in no sense be accounted a part of Mans Morall duty For this is not performed by man because Gods will commands it but wrought in him because Gods power imprints it And then 3. This will evacuate the force of the Ministery the use of Commands and exhortations expostulations and reproofs For how can you in Gods Name seriously command a man under pain of death and promise of life to do that as his duty which you teach him to believe that God will insuperably effect himself If he believes that God must and will do it by his irresistible determining Grace he cannot reasonably believe that he doth seriously require it as his duty because it implyes a contradiction that God should at once will an effect to be done by another and yet will to do it himself alone What do your Ministery then amount unto 'T is but the Revelation of what God will do in mens souls like the Angels Message to the Blessed Virgin Luk. 1.30 with 35. Fear not for thou hast found favour with God for the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee Therefore that Holy thing that Faith and Repentance that shall be borne of thee shall be called the work of God Thus you may signifie to your Beloved Disciples what God will doe for and in their souls But if you should attempt the use of exhortations c. to move them to undertake that work as their duty your exhortations would lose all their force and propriety for that work you say is actually and really of Gods Impression Now when Gods Omnipotent hand of Grace sets the Determining Presse on work which is not moved at all by your exhortations they being directed onely to souls that are merely Passive under it that work of Faith and Repentance is stampt upon them irresistibly And can it consist with Gods wisdome to attaque a Sinner thus If you will be wrought upon and converted and believe as the force of my insuperable Grace shall irresistibly determine you you shall be saved And can you find in your heart to exhort your Auditors and to fall down upon your knees to them as you say many times you would do to intreat and beseech them not to wrastle with Omnipotency but to suffer themselves to be moved and determined by it And can you threaten woe and eternall death to others if they be not thus determined telling them withall which is a part