we acknowledge of predestination both in the way of a meritorious cause on Christs part and in the way of a disposing cause on our part For God we say hath predestinated to bestow upon us both grace and glory for Christs sake where Christ is made a meritorious cause of grace and glory but not of the act of predestination And farther we say that God hath predestinated to bestow glory upon us as a reward of grace as a reward of faith repentance and good workes and to this purpose it is said that God by his grace doth make us meet partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light Coloss 1. 12. But as for the bestowing of grace on any we say there is no cause thereof on mans part For he hath mercy on whom he will Rom. 9. 18. and he hath called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace 2 Timoth. 1. 9. Now let us apply this to reprobation which is the will of God as well as predestination and if there can be no cause of predestination quoad actum Praedestinantis because there can be no cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis Who seeth not that by the same reason there can be no cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And if it be a mad thing to maintain that merits are the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis it must be as mad a thing to maintain that any merits of the creature can be the cause of reprobation quoad actum reprobantis And this doctrine Aquinas applies expresly to Reprobation it selfe upon the 9. Rom. Lect. 2 da at the end of these words Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis but how ex parte actus reprobantis nothing lesse but rather ex parte effectus and what effect not the denying of grace but only as touching the inflicting of punishment thus Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis ex parte paenae quae praeparatur reprobatis in quantum scilicet Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata quae à seipsis habent non à Deo And farther we prove this both by cleare evidence of Scripture and cleare evidence of reason and thirdly by as cleare a representation of their infatuation that oppose this doctrine and particularly of the Author of this discourse First by cleare evidence of Scripture Rom. 9. 11. Where the Apostle proves that Election stands not of good works by an argument drawn from the circumstance of the time when that Oracle The elder shall serve the younger was delivered together with the present condition of Jacob and Esau answerable to that time thus Before the children were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger Therefore the purpose of God according to Election stands not of good workes Now look by what strength of reason the Apostle concludes this of Election by the same strength of argumentation may I conclude of reprobation in proportion thus Before the Children were borne or had done Good or Evill it was said to Rebecca The Elder shall serve the Younger therefore the purpose of God according to reprobation stands not of evill workes that is like as good workes are not the cause of Election so evill workes are not the cause of Reprobation to wit quoad actum reprobantis as touching the very act and eternall decree of God it selfe Secondly observe I pray whether my reason be not as cleare If God upon the foresight of sin doth ordain a man unto damnation thus I am content to propose it in the most rigorous manner then this is done either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as it is confessed and the cause is evident for undoubtedly he could annihilate them and so he can the holiest creature that lives as all sides confesse Therefore it must be by the constitution of God but neither can this hold For if so then God did constitute that is ordaine that upon the foresight of sin he would ordaine men unto damnation Where observe that the act of divine ordination is made the object of divine ordination as much as to say he did ordaine to ordaine or he did decree to decree Whereas the objects of Gods decrees are alwaies things temporall as for example We say well God did decree to create the world to make man out of the earth to send Christ into the World to preserve us to redeeme us sanctify us save us But Gods ordination or decree is an act eternall and cannot be the object of his decree or ordination I challenge all the Powers of darknes to answer this and to vindicate the Tenent which I impugne from that absurdity which I charge upon it if they can O but some will say it 's very harsh to say that God of his meer pleasure doth ordain men unto damnation I am content to doe my endeavour to remove this scandall out of the way of honest hearts yea and out of the way of others also First therefore consider is it fit to resist the evidence of divine truth because it is harsh to mens affections Secondly Wherein consists this harshnesse Is it in this that nothing is the cause of Gods decree and will nothing temper the harshnes of it unles a thing temporall as sinne be made the cause of Gods will which is eternall and even God himselfe But let us deale plainly and tell me in truth whether the harshnes doth not consist in this That the meer pleasure of Gods will seems to be made the cause not of Gods decree only but of damnation also as if God did damne men not for sin but of his meer pleasure And this I confesse is wondrous harsh and yet no more harsh then it is untrue though in this jugling world things are so carried by some who will both shuffle and cutt and deale themselves as if we made God of meer pleasure to damne men and not for sin which is a thing utterly impossible damnation being such a notion as hath essentiall reference unto sin But if God damne no man but for sinne and decreed to damne no man but for sinne what if the meer pleasure of God be the cause of this decree what harshnes I say is this As for example Zimri or Cosby perished in their incestuous act and gave up both lust and ghost together so going as it were quick to Hell never fearing the judgements of God untill they felt them If we say God decreed they should be cut off in this sin of theirs and be damned for it What hatshnes I pray in this though God made this decree of meer pleasure For is it not manifest he did For could he not if it had pleased him have caused them to outlive this sin of theirs and given them space for repentance and
be made after Gods image Gen. 1. 27. Nor when they are regenerated to be renewed after the same image Col. 3. 10. And to be made partakers of the Divine nature 2 Pet. 1. 4. That Picture cannot be the picture of such a man which doth not in its parts and lineaments clearly resemble him nor can we be truly the image of God in respect of our graces if in these graces there be not a resemblance of Gods Attributes 3. We may not safely imitate God as we are commanded Be you perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect Math. 5. 48. and be ye holy as I am holy Nor when we shew forth mercy justice and truth in our actions can we be properly said to imitate God if these be one thing in God and in men another These two things being thus premised viz. that Gods mercy justice and truth are three of his chief Attributes in the exercise of which he takes himselfe to be much glorified and that we are to measure these Attributes by the same vertues in ourselves I come to the proofe of my second reason against absolute reprobation which is that it opposeth some of Gods principall Attributes particularly his justice mercy and truth TWISSE Consideration I Cannot but wonder at the performances of the true Author of this Discourse in comparing that which goes before with that which comes after His poverty of argumentation out of Scripture and the exuberancy of his discourse following Before he was in some straits but now he seems to have gotten Sea roome enough yet this is my comfort I seem to perceive out of what chimney all this smoak proceeds and to be as well acquainted with the spirit that breatheth here as if I were at his elbow while he penned it Agnosco veteris vestigia flammae such like are Doctor Jacksons discourses and him I have known of old and his Ephestion also I professe willingly of Scholar acquaintance they were my greatest and dearest But seeing it hath pleased God to put such a difference between us I would have both them and the World know I doe as little regard them as feare them Arminius himselfe is never more plausible then in such like extravagant discourses as a positive Theologue But these inspirations were never derived from him they are flowers of another garden These have been shapen in a more Philosophicall brain whereof some having gotten the reputation give Oracles therehence first to forme interpretations of Scriptures in congruity to these Theorems as the true Author blusheth not to professe which when he hath perswaded the World of I see no cause to the contrary but he may adventure a degree farther and perswade the burning of the Bible so farre as it concerneth the Doctrine of Predestination and Reprobation Grace and Free-will and content themselves with these magisteriall precepts as most sufficient and soveraigne for the endoctrinations of the Christian World in these poynts But he might have spared his pains in proving this consequence that if our Doctrine of Reprobation be contradictory to Gods principall attributes it cannot be true I say he might have spared the proofe hereof for all that he brings in proofe of this is but darknesse in comparison of the domesticall light and selfe-evidence which this consequence carryeth with it His premises here and discourse thereof is like unto the Turkes parly before the encounter when he challenged any one of Scanderbegs army to a single combate For as that parley was meerely complementall and to no purpose save only as he might conceit to abate the fervor of his opposite who longed to be dealing with him so this introduction I find to be of no Scholasticall use in the world but meerely Politick to work some impression upon the readers affections where by it may come to passe that when he reads of Gods mercy and justice as here it is set forth he may be the more enclined to judge thereof according to the genius of human mercy and justice Yet I am content to give my selfe to be wrought upon by these pretty contemplations as farre as I shall be convicted of any truth and sobriety in them though I willingly professe I am very suspicious for I love to betray my infirmities that there is little or no truth and sobriety at all in them 1. Now because he hopes to hatch much advantage unto his cause out of these attributes and to that purpose he sitts very long upon them though his market may be never the better for all that He tells us these are Gods chief attributes and as it appeareth by that which followeth his practice is to disparage his power which I call the Lords Soveraignty in comparison to these Now it seems they are chiefe indeed in his opinion for the furthering of his cause but as for any absolute chiefty they have in God I am not as yet acquainted therewith what I may be by this Authors performances I know not yet in the next page save one he professeth expressely That all Gods excellencies are infinitely good and one is not greater then another wherein I doe much approve his judgement as savouring of more depth then this which yet I think not that he who pretends to be the Author of this discourse in respect of his minority should be likely to broach as for other respects of principality I shall be ready to take notice of them in due place But when he saith God is most glorified in the manifestation of mercy justice and truth it is a very odde phrase For it is one thing to be glorious another thing to be glorified dare he deny that God is as glorious in his power and soveraignty as in his mercy justice and truth As for the glorifying of him that depends upon the will of the creature It may be some are more thankfull unto God for blessing them with health and riches and honour and preferment then for bestowing his Gospell upon them but will it follow herehence that his goodnesse in giving riches c. is more glorious then his goodnesse is seen in giving us his Word and Gospell We read that when God laid the foundations of the earth the Starres of the morning praised God together and all the children of God rejoyced Job 38. 7. did these Angells glorify God for his mercy justice and truth in the creating of them We read sometimes of Gods power sometimes of his wisdome manifested in the Creation as Jer. 10. 11. and 51. 11. and Psal 136. 5. Jer. 10. 12. c. But no where have I read that I can remember he made the World by his mercy justice or truth and Revel 4. 11. I find the glory of power given unto God in the creation by the 24 Elders but neither there nor any where else that I know is the glory of his mercy justice and truth given unto God therein Thou art worthy O Lord to receive glory and honour and power for thou hast created all
saith then for inflicting eternall death only on them that are guilty of it as we say But let we him finish the Declamation he hath begunne Is his mercy abundant doth it extend it selfe farther then justice when it is tackt up so short limited to a very few chosen ones when a hundred for one at least are unavoidably cast away out of his only will and pleasure As touching this I have already shewed how much he is out in his Algebra but let that passe unlesse this Divine take upon him to deliver truer Oracles then Saint Paul we are bound to believe that the elect only are vessells of mercy distinguished from reprobates as vessells of wrath Rom. 9. 22 23. and toward these alone it is that his mercy is abundant in the way of bestowing saving and spirituall graces It is untrue that he hath proved any such thing as he pretends namely that Gods mercy is extended to more persons then his justice And applied aright namely as touching mercy seen in pardoning sinnes in changing the heart and saving soules which are peculiar to Gods elect the most brazen faced opposite to Gods holy truth that liveth cannot deny but that they to whom these are granted are farre fewer then they to whom they are denied And if within the Church only for there only are found such as feare God his mercy extends to thousands of them that feare him when but to the third and fourth generation he punisheth the sinnes of the Father upon the Children which is all the proofe this Author brings to this purpose it followeth not herehence that his mercy extendeth any whit to more then doth his justice considering the small proportion of those within the Church and therein of them that feare him in comparison to those without the Church And like as visiting the sinne of Fathers which is commonly understood of temporall punishments so in proportion the mercy is to be understood of temporall mercy And we well know that it is nothing necessary that a man that fears God should have children And like as God doth not alwaies thus visit the sinnes of Fathers upon the Children in like sort it is not alwaies necessary that God should shew mercy to thousands of every one of them that feare him He dealt so with Abraham Isaack and Iacob they to whom the Law was delivered knew this full well then again must not they who look to have an interest in this gracious promise look unto it that they walk in the steps of their Forefathers that feared God By all which may appeare the superficiary nature of this Disputants argumentation even then when the zeale of his cause makes him as most confident so also most luxuriant Lastly doe we say that God damnes any man out of his only will and pleasure Doe we not professe that he damnes no man but for sinne And as he damnes no man but for sinne so likewise that he decreed to damne no man but for sinne though there could be no cause of this his decree but of his meere will and pleasure he made this decree namely to damne many thousands for their sinnes But let him come to an end of this his roaving discourse when he thinks good and not before Or doth his love passe knowledge when we see daily greater love then this in men and other creatures What Father or Mother would determine their children to certain death or to cruell torments worse then death for one only offence and that committed too not by them in their own persons but by some other and only imputed unto them How much lesse would they give themselves to beget Children and bring them forth that they might bring them to the rack fire gallowes and such like tortures and deaths What doe I heare Doth man or any creature shew more love to their Children then God doth towards his Elect Did they ever provide such a sacrifice to make satisfaction for their Childrens sinnes as God did provide for his Yea but reprobates also are Gods Children this must needs be his meaning though in plain termes he spared to expresse so much How unnaturall then was Christ who would not pray for the World if they were all his children And what meant he to professe that he sanctified himselfe only for them for whom he prayed Which sanctification of himselfe was in respect of the offering up of himselfe upon the crosse as Maldonate confesseth was the interpretation of all the Fathers whom he had read And in that prayer professeth of them saying they are thine and thou gavest them unto me as much as to say the World was not his And farther consider Is it safe to measure out Gods proceedings by the proceedings of men What Father or Mother would be content to execute a Child of theirs upon the Gallowes when by some capitall crime he hath deserved it How much lesse hold them upon the rack of continuall tortures what then must not God be allowed to inflict eternall death upon his creatures And what hath an earthly Father or Mother to doe either to determine or execute death on any This belongs to God not to man unlesse he make choyce of them as of his Ministers for the execution of vengeance But this Author is nothing yet awaked out of his dreames or his Arminian Lethargy Yet I hope he will grant that God did foresee all this even the sinnes of Judas in betraying and of the Jewes in crucifying the Sonne of God yet neverthelesse he was content to bring forth both him and them into the World Now what earthly Father and Mother would not make choyce rather to be Childlesse then to bring forth such children as should deale with them as Nero dealt with his Mother Proceed then and as from the affections of earthly Fathers and Mothers he disputes against the absolutenesse of Gods decrees so also in the next place let him conclude the like to the utter overthrowing of Gods foreknowledge Yet who of our Divine saith that God for one offence hath determined death and tortures to any reprobate of ripe years Doe they not all professe that as many as dye in actuall sinnes unrepented of God determined to damne them for those actuall sinnes unrepented of I doe not think he can alleadge any that denies this Againe what one of our Divines maintaines that Infants perishing in originall sinne are damned for that sinne which is made theirs only by imputation What a shamelesse habit hath he gotten to himselfe to deliver untruths yet will he not I warrant you be accounted a Pelagian neither will he plainly deny originall sinne as Grevincovius is said to have done and that testibus convinci potuit Their Tenets are nothing lesse shamefull then Pelagius his Tenets were only they have not that ingenuity which Pelagius had in professing plainly that there was no originall sinne conveyed unto us by propagation Now he comes more closely unto the matter yet but a little neither a
understandings purged from prejudice and false principles 5. My fifth argument is this If sinne be the cause of Reprobation that is of the decree of damnation then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God not by necessity of nature as all that hitherto I have known confesse But I say neither can it be by the free constitution of God for mark what a notorious absurdity followeth hence and that unavoidably namely that God did ordaine that upon foresight of sinne he would ordaine them to damnation marke it well God did ordaine that he would ordaine or God did decree that he would decree In which words Gods eternall decree is made the object of Gods decree Whereas it is well known that the objects of Gods decrees are meerely things temporall and cannot be things eternall we truly say God did decree to create the World to preserve the World to redeeme us call us justify us sanctify and save us but it cannot be truly said that God did decree to decree or ordaine to ordaine for to decree is the act of Gods will and therefore it cannot be the object of the act of Gods will Yet these arguments I am not so enamoured with as to force the interpretations of Scripture to such a sense as is sutable hereunto presuming of the purity of my understanding as purged from prejudice and false principles I could willingly content my selfe with observation of the Apostles discourse in arguing to this effect Before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the elder shall serve the younger therefore the purpose of God according to election stands not of works In like manner may I discourse Before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it was said the elder shall serve the younger therefore the purpose of God concerning Reprobation stands not of works And like as hence it is inferred that therefore election stands not of good works so therehence may I inferre that therefore reprobation stands not of evill works 6. If sinne foreseen be the cause meritorious of reprobation then faith and repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto election For therefore evill works foreseen are made the meritorious cause of reprobation because evill works exsistent are the meritorious cause of damnation And if this be true then also because Faith and Repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto salvation then by the same force of reason faith repentance and good workes foreseen must be the disposing cause unto election But faith repentance and good workes foreseen are not the disposing causes unto election as I prove thus 1. If they were then the purpose of God according to election should be of faith repentance and good works which is expressely denyed by the Apostle as touching the last part and may as evidently be proved to be denied by him in effect of the other parts also by the same force of argumentation which he useth as for example from this anticedent of the Apostles before the Children were borne or had done good or evill it no more evidently followeth that therefore the purpose of God according to election is not of workes than it followeth that the same purpose of God according to election is not of faith nor of repentance For before they were borne they were no more capable of faith or of repentance than of any other good works And undoubtedly faith and repentance are as good works as any other 2. If God doth absolutely work faith in some and not in others according to the meer pleasure of his will then it cannot be said that faith foreseen is the cause of any mans election For in this case faith is rather the means of salvation then salvation a means of faith and consequently the intention of salvation rather precedes the intention of faith than the intention of faith can be said to precede the intention of salvation And to this the Scripture accords Acts 1348. As many believed as were ordained to everlasting life making ordination to everlasting life the cause why men believed answerable hereunto is that Acts 2. last God added daily to the Church such as should be saved and that of Paul to Titus according to the faith of Gods elect So that according to Pauls phrase fides est electorum but according to the Arminians Doctrine the inverse hereof is a more proper and naturall predication as to say electio est fidelium But God doth absolutely work faith in some men according to the meer pleasure of his will denying the same grace to others which I prove 1. By Scripture Rom. 9. 18. God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth compared with Rom. 11. 30. Yee in times past have not believed but now have obtained mercy where it appears by the Antithesis that to find mercy is to believe that is to obtain the grace of faith at the hands of God in Saint Pauls phrase 2. By cleare reason for if it be not the meer pleasure of Gods will that is the cause hereof then the cause hereof must be some good workes which he finds in some and not in others whence it manifestly followeth that God giveth grace according unto works which in the phrase of the ancients is according to merits and for 1200 years together this hath been reputed in the Church of God meere Pelagianisme 2. I further demand what that good worke is whereupon God workes it in one when he refuseth to worke it in another Here the answer I find given is this that God doth work in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle credere modo velit Now of the absurdity hereof I appeale to the very light of nature and let all the books that ever were written on this argument be searched and let it be enquired whether ever any did expresse themselves in the manner of so palpable and grosse absurdity as wherein the act of willing is made the condition of it selfe whence it followeth evidently that it must be both before it selfe and after it selfe for the condition must allwaies exsist before the thing conditionated Yet they are driven upon these rocks of absurdities in spight of their teeth so shamefull is the issue of their discourses who in hatred of Gods truth revealed in Gods word and in a proud conceit of their own performances in the way of argumentation dare prescribe rules to all others how to carry themselves in the interpretation of Scriptures as namely to be so warie as that they doe not deliver any thing repugnant to understandings purged from prejudice and false principles as if the word of God supposed them that are admitted to the studying thereof to have their understandings already purged from prejudice and false principles not that it is given by God for this very end namely to purge our understandings for what is the illumination or opening of the eyes of the mind other than the purging of
the decision whereof carryeth with it the decision of all the rest this Author should unshamefacedly decline it But some there be that hate the light because their workes are evill but doth it become him to taxe others for declining the triall when none sheweth more vile carriage this way then himselfe What that Privy-Councellor was I know not nor have I any evidence of the truth of the story but as it lyeth dictated at pleasure I have shewed how it nothing disadvantageth our cause though the Author of that speech were not only a Privy-Councellor but a great Divine too Yet amongst many good there might be some bad in Queen Elizabeths dayes If that were true which is reported to have been mentioned by D r Lively in a Lecture of his in Cambridge namely that a certaine Booke was found under a Privy-Councellors pillow whose inscription was this De tribus Mundi impostoribus Mose Christo Mahumite As for fate stoicall to give the Divell his right I no where find it maintained by any of them so as to prejudice mens wills but by many great ones I find this expresly denyed and hereof I have already spoken more at large Still he keepes his course in impugning an absolute decree determining mens ends precisely What secret misteries he conceales in the Word precisely I know not but it is aparent we maintaine no such determining the Salvation of any man so as to exclude a Godly life We both know and teach that without Holinesse as much as to say without a Godly life no man shall see God But we further say that this is not wholy the decree of predestination though this Author with his Remonstrants would faine rest here but we farther say that a Godly life is the gift of Gods grace and that God bestowes this gift on whom he will but this Author hath no great lust to oppose us here The more Equivocall a phraise is the fitter it is to serve his turne that lyes upon advantages to promote error and obscure truth And therefore keepes himselfe to the absolute decree and precise determinations either not understanding or not considering that an absolute decree may be takendivers waies either quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing or quoad res volitas as touching the things willed the decree properly signifies the act of God willing but this Author in consideratly takes it quoad res volitas as touching the things willed all along as appeares by his oppossing it to decree or will conditionall And will conditionall with him is such as when the thing willed is not effected because the condition is not performed They are his owne words in the last Section save one of his former sorts of reasons the very last words As for example the will of Saving men is not accomplished because men doe not believe Then as touching the things willed Gods decrees being considered here also arise different considerations for as much as the things willed are different Grace and Glory As for Glory and Salvation we doe not say that God hath decreed to confer that absolutly but only conditionally yet thereupon he stiks throughout supposing his adversaries to maintaine an absolute decree concerning the conferring of Salvation abolutely which is most untrue wherein he fights without any adversary yet there he dischargeth himselfe very strenuously and layes about him like a mad man But as for grace to wit the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance this we readily professe that God doth bestow it absolutly to wit on whom he will according to the meere pleasure of his will All this It is the glory of this Author in his discourse most juditiously to confound which made him the more to abound in matter that he might seem to say some thing when indeed it is nothing supple to the purpose And to meet with him in every particular of his conclusion The events to wit of Salvation or damnation are not at all decreed by God to come to passe absolutely but meerely conditionally and consequently not unavoydably but avoydably rather like as things that come to passe contingently doe come to passe with a possibility not to come to passe and accordingly God decreed they should came to passe contingently And consequently mens actions hereabouts are not unprofitable nay they are both necessary for obtayning the ends here intimated such as never faile of obtayning them As for example Sanctification of the spirit and faith of the truth never faile of procuring Salvation for as much as God ordained by these meanes to bring men unto Salvation 2 Thess 2. 13. And by no meanes else And therefore most absurd it is to conceive that the practise of Godlinesse proves unprofitable and from such wild promises the unprofitable nature of the prctise of Godlinesse can prove no better then a wild conclusion I come to his two witnesses the first is Calv. Inst l. 3. c. 23. sect 14. Si quis ita plebem compellet si non creditis ideo fit quia jam divinitus exitio destinati estis is non modo ignaviam fovet sed indulget malitiae This saith this Author is as much to say as this If a man should set downe the doctrine of Reprobation in its colours and explaine it to people in a cleare and lively fashion he would hereby open a doore to liberty and prophanenesse Now this Calvin delivereth as out of Austin as appeareth both by his entrance hereunto and by his shutting up of it His entrance into it is this Et tamen ut singulare aedificationis studium sancto viro fuit that is Austin sic docendi veri rationem temperat ut prudenter caveatur quoad licet offensio Nam iquae vere dicuntur congruenter simul posse dici admonet The man he speakes of still is Austin as is apparent to him that shall consider the coherence of this Section with the former Then he sets downe the inconvenient manner of Preaching this truth as Austin doth though not in Austins words but in his owne Si quis ita plebem compellet si non creditis ideo fit quia jam divinitus exitio destinati estis c. And shutting the whole up he expressely names Austin misliking such manner of Preaching thus Tales itaque Augustinus non immerito tanquam vel insulsos Doctores vel sinistros ominosos Prophetas ab Ecclesia jubet facessere What is the mystery then of this that Calvin is here brought in for a witnesse in making a relation of Austins discourse and Austin himselfe whose judgement Calvin doth but relate is pretermitted especially considering that Austins testimony where it serves his turne would give farre more credit to his cause then Calvins you will give me leave to guesse at the mistery which I take to be this Calvin is well known to be opposite unto him in the doctrine of reprobation but Calvin acknowledging that this Doctrine might be delivered in a harsh
that they shall come to passe in such a manner as joyned with a possibility of not cōing to passe otherwise they should come to passe not contingently but necessarily But it is growne to be this Authours naturall genius miserably to overreach while he keeps himselfe to his own formes inshaping the opinion of his adversaries impatient to be beaten out of them and to have his veteres avias à pulmone repelli oldgrandmothers vain conceits to be pulled out of Lastly this Authour shapeth us to make damnation an end intended by God which we conceive to be a very shallow project we know nothing but Gods owne glory that can be this end And therefore even there where Solomon professeth that God made the wicked against the day of Evill herewithall acknowledgeth that God made all thinges forhimselfe At length we have gotten cleare aboard to come acquainted with this Authours full discourse and not by patches as hitherto we have done For here he promiseth to acquaint us with the reasons that have convinced him of the untruth of absolute Reprobation as it is carried the upper way and like a Martialist a man at armes he tells us they fight against it and thus the interpolator discourseth The first part of the first Argument against the supralapsarians sect 1. They are drawen ab incommodo from the greater evils and inconveniences which issue from it naturally which may be referred to two maine heads 1 The dishonour of God 2 The overthrow of religion and government It dishououreth God For it chargeth him deeply with two things no wayes agreeable to his nature 1 Mens Eternall torments in Hell 2 Their sinnes on Earth First It chargeth him with Mens eternall torments in Hell and maketh him to be the prime principall 2nd invincible cause of the damnation of Millions of miserable soules The prime cause because it reporteth him to have appointed them to distruction of his owne voluntary disposition antecedent to all deserts in them and the Principall and invincible cause because it maketh the Damnation of Reprobates to be necessary and unavoydable thorough Gods absolute and uncontroulable decree and soe necessary that they can no more escape it then poore Astyanax could avoyd the breaking of his necke when the Graecians tumbled him downe from the Tower of Troy Now this is an neavy charge contrary to scripture Gods nature and sound Reason 1 To Scripture which makes man the Principall nay the only cause in opposition to God of his owne ruine Thy destruction is of thy selfe ô Israell but in me is thine help As I live saith the Lord I will not the death of the wicked c. Turne yee turne yee why will yee dye He doth not afflict willingly nor greive the Children of men To which speech for likeneile sake I will joyne one of Prospers Gods predestination is to many the cause of standing to none of falling 2 It is contrary to Gods nature who sets forth himselfe to be a God mercifull gracious long suffering abundant in goodnesse c. And he is acknowledged to be soe by King David Thou Lord art good and mercifull and of great Kindnesse to all them that call upon thee And by the Prophets Joell Jonah and Michah He is gracious and mercifull slow to anger and of great Kindnesse And who saith Micah is a God like unto thee that taketh away iniquity c. He retaineth not his wrath for ever because mercy pleaseth him 3 'T is contrary also to sound reason which cannot but argue such a Decree of extreame cruelty and consequently remove it from the father of mercyes We cannot in reason thinke that any man in the world can so farre put off humanity and nature as to resolve with himselfe to marry and beget Children that after they be borne and have lived a while with him he may hang them up by the tongues teare thir flesh with scourges pull it from their bones with burning pincers or put them to any cruell tortures that by thus torturing them he may shew what his Authority and power is over them Much lesse can we believe without great violence to reason that the God of mercy can so farre forget himselfe as out of his absolute pleasure to ordaine such infinite multitudes of his Children made after his owne image to everlasting fire and create them one after another that after the end of a short life here he might torment them without end hereafter to shew his power and soveraingty over them If to destroy the righteous with the wicked temporally be such a peece of injustice that Abraham removeth it from God with an Absit wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked that be farre from thee O Lord. shall not the judge of all the world doe right How deepely may we thinke would that good man have detested one single thought that God resolveth upon the destruction of many innocent soules eternally in hell fire Here this Authour carrieth himselfe like another Ptolomeus Ceraunus or as if he had some cheife place in the lightning legion not by his prayers but by his discourse he seemes to thunder and to lighten all along When the Lord appeared to Elias he was neither in the mighty wind nor in the earthquake nor in the fire but in the still and soft voyce I hope to prove all this to be but Ignis fatuus Mountebancks use to make great ostentation and crackes but commonly they end in meere impostures and it is no hing strange when men opposing the grace of God loose their owne witts and please themselves in the confusion of their owne senses For when men are in love with their owne errours they hate the light yea the very light of nature in the distinct notice of it would be an offence unto them Can this Authour be ignorant of that which every meane Sophister knowes that there be foure kinds of causes Materiall Formall Efficient Finall that he should expatiate thus in speaking of a cause without all distinction Is it strange that God should be a prime cause and principall in execution of vengeance Doth he not professe saying vengeance is mine and I will repay Is he not called the God to whom vengeance belongeth And are not his magistrates his Ministers to execute vengeance temporall here in this world And can any sober man dout whether God be invincible whom the Apostle pronounceth to be irresistable Againe an efficient cause admits farther distinction for it is either Physicall or Morall Physicall is that which really workes or executes any thing as every tradesman hath his worke which his hands doe make so God hath his worke which he executes and his worke is judgment as well as mercy I am the Lord which shew mercy and judgment and righteousnesse for in these things I delight saith the Lord and he would have us when we doe glory glory in this that we doe understand and know him to
words ye therefore heare them not because ye are not of God now what reasonable mā can deny but that it is a sin not to heare God's words then doth not our Saviour plainly professe that the true cause hereof is because they are not of God Now if to be of God in this place doth signifie God's Election then the cause of their sinnes hereby is made God 's not electing of them But if this phrase To be of God signifie God's regenerating of them as I thinke it doth then God's not regenerating of them is made the cause of this their disobedience in not hearing God's word 's and indeed the evill of sinne hath noe efficient cause but deficient only as Austine hath delivered long agoe And God is not bound to any either to elect him or regenerate him so that in failing to regenerate mā he doth not deficere or faile in any culpable mā ner now let every indifferent Reader judge whether here be not Dignus vindice nodus a knot worthy to be loosed it will require some worth of learning in him that solves it And is it decent for this Authour to censure a man for a conclusion made by him out of the word of God without shewing the faultinesse either of his interpretation thereof or of his consequence framed therehence So that this Author's wit cunning is more to be cōmended in not specifying the place where Piscator delivers this doctrine then either his learning or his honesty He was loath to raise spirits afterwards to prove unable to lay them Therefore thus I answer in behalfe of Piscator though God her by me made the cause why sōe heare not God's words to wit in as much as he doth not regenerate thē nor give the eies to see nor eares to heare an heart to perceive according to that of Moses Yet he doth not make God any culpable cause neither indeed is he any culpable cause while he failes to performe so gracious a worke towards thē the reason whereof is this He and he alone is a culpable cause who failes in doing that which he ought to do ut God all be it he doth not regenerate a man yet he failes not of doing that which he ought to doe For it is no duty of his to regenerate any man for he is bound to none Now to be the Authour of sinne is not only to be the cause thereof but to be a culpable cause thereof Undoubtedly God could preserve any man from sinne if it pleased him and if he doth not he is nothing faulty Secondly I answere that in true account God is only the cause why our naturall infidelity is not healed our corruption not cured Like as a Physitian may be said to be the cause why such a man continues sicke in as much as he could cure him but will not Soe God could cure the infidelitie of all but will not Only here is the difference the Physitian may be a culpable cause as who is bound to love his neighbour as himselfe but God being bound to none is no culpable cause of man's continuance in sinne and in the hardnesse of his heart albeit he can cure him but will not As for Piscator's saying here mentioned Reprobates are appointed precisely to this double evill to be punished everlastingly and to sinne and therefore to sinne that they may be justly punished Hereing are two things charged upon Piscator 1. That Reprobates are precisely appointed by God to perish everlastingly To this I answer that noe Arminiā that I know denies Reprobates to be appoinby God to everlasting damnation All the question is about the manner of appointing them namely whether this appointment of God proceeds meerly according to his meer pleasure or upon the foresight of sinne We say it proceeds meerly according to the good pleasure of God and not upon the foresight of sinne preceding And this we not only say but prove thus If reprobation proceed upon the foresight of sinne then it were of men's evill workes Now looke upon what grounds the Apostle proves that election is not of good workes upon the same ground it is evident that reprobation is not of evill works for the argumēt for the one is this Before Iacob Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therfore election is not of good works In like manner thus I reason concerning Reprobation Before Iacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therefore reprobation is not of evill workes 2. If God doth ordaine any man to damnation upon foresight of sin then this sin foreseen is the cause of the Divine ordinance but sin foreseen cannot be the cause why God ordained man to damnation as I prove thus If it be the cause then either by the necessity of nature or by the ordinance of God not by necessity of nature For undoubtedly God if it pleased him could ordaine to annihilate them for their sinnes instead of punishing them with eternall fire Nor can it be the cause of any such decree by the free ordinance of God For if it were marke what intolerable absurdityes would follow namely this That God did ordaine that upon the foresight of sinne he would ordaine men unto damnation whereby God's eternall ordination is made the object of God's ordination whereas all know that the Objects of God's decrees which are all one with his ordinations are things temporall not things eternall 3. If the foresight of sinne goes before the decree of damnation then the decree of permitting sinne goes before the decree of damning for sin that is the permission of sinne was first in intention and consequently it ought to be last in execution that is First man should be damned for sin and not till afterwards permitted to sinne The second thing charged upon Piscator is this that Reprobates are precisely appointed to sin Now here the crimination grates not upō the manner of being appointed thereunto otherwise a way could be opened for a progresse in infinitum Now why should it be any more a fault in Piscator to say of some that they are appointed to sinne then in Peter to say of some that they are appointed to disobedience or in all the Apostles to professe that all the outrages committed by Herod and Pilate by the Gentiles and people of Israell were such as Gods hand his counsell had before determined to be done or why doth Piscator make God to be the Authour of sinne in this more then Peter and all the Apostles And considering this man's unconscionable carriage in this let the Reader take heed how he suffers himselfe to be gull'd by this Authour and drawne to censure such speeches in Piscator as making God the Authour of sinne when hereby he is drawne ere he is aware to passe the like censure on the Apostles And the
built upon the freenes of the other in not being given according unto men's merits As it appeares de bono perseverantiae cap. 15. Where having proposed some exceptions of the Massilienses made against his doctrine of predestination comming to make answer thereunto he begins thus Ista cum dicuntur saith he ita nos à confitenda Dei gratia id est quae non secundum merita nostra datur a confitenda secundum eam predestinatione sanctorum deterrere non debent When these things are objected they must not deterre us from confessing God's grace I meane such a grace as is not given accordiog unto works nor from confessing the predestination of Saints according thereunto Now if the absolutenesse of predestination be grounded upon this that grace is not given according unto merits the scripture phrase denies it to be given according unto workes But Bellarmine acknowledgeth that in this Argument merits and workes are taken by the Ancients in one and the same sense it followeth that as many as deny the absolutenesse of predestination must therewithall maintaine that Grace is given according to men's merits or works And the reason is evident For if God doth not give grace according unto men's works but of his mere pleasure decreed to give grace unto some and not upon consideration of their works And this is to elect absolutely and antecedently without the foresight of any deserving yea of any works though by that expression which this Authour useth he doth sufficienty manifest that his opinion is that God elects not only upō the foresight of men's workes but upon the foresight of men's deservings It is farther considerable to prevent the reaches of such crafty foxes as we have to deale with whose course is in joyning the decree of conversion and salvation together to translate that which belongs unto one unto the other most unreasonably For albeit God proceeds according to the mere pleasure and without all respect to workes in conferring grace and decreeth accordingly to conferre it Yet he proceeds not merely according unto pleasure and without all respect of works in conferring glory but according unto a Covenant which is this whosoever beleiveth shall be saved and accordingly he bestowes the kingdome of heaven by way of reward for faith repentance and good workes This hath Christ deserved at the hands of his Father that our weake performances should be thus rewarded Lastly it is farther to be considered that God as he thus bestoweth salvation by way of reward of our faith repentance so from everlasting he did decree to bestowe salvation namely by way of reward Not that either faith or repentance or good workes any or all of these were the cause least of all the deserving cause of God's decree or antecedaneous to his decree but of his mere pleasure decreed both to give the grace of faith and repentance and to bestow eternall life by way of a reward thereof as may farther be proved and that clearly divers waies 1. By the Apostl's discourse where he discourseth after this manner Before Esau and Iacob were borne or had done good or evill it was said that the Elder shall serve the younger therefore election is not of workes But if election did proceeed upon the foresight of faith repentance and good workes or any of them then it might justly be said that it were of faith repentance or good workes or of all of them And the force of the Apostles argument extends to conclude that election is noe more of faith or of repentance then of workes not only because faith and repentance are workes and so accounted in Scripture phrase as it appeares Io 6. 29. But cheifely because before men are borne they are uncapable of faith and repentance as of good workes 2. If faith were a motive cause unto election then either it were so of it 's own nature or by constitution Divine not of it's own nature as it is apparent If by constitution divine mark what strange absurdities follow namely this that God did ordaine that upon the fore sight of faith he would ordaine men unto salvation whereby God's eternall ordination is made the object of his ordination whereas the Objects of God's decrees are alwaies things temporall never any thing that is eternall 3. It cannot be said that God giveth salvation to the end he may give them faith but it may farre more congruously be said that God gives faith to the end that he may save them therefore the intention of salvation is rather before the intention of giving faith then the intention of giving faith is before the intention of giving salvation Or better thus if God foresee faith before he decrees salvation then the intention of giving faith without which God cannot foresee faith is before the intention of giving salvation and consequently the giving of faith should be the last in execution that is men shall first be saved and aferwards have faith bestowed upon them to wit in another world where they live by sight and not by faith I come to the decree of reprobation the Objects whereof are two proportionable to the two objects of election or predestination The first is permission of sin the second is Damnation for sinne according to that of Aquinas Reprobatio includit voluntatem permitendi culpam damnationem inferendi pro culpâ Reprobation includes a will to permit sinne and to inflict damnation for sinne The first object of reprobation I say is permission of sinne not Sin as this Authour would have it but permission of sinne Because these decrees to wit of permitting sinne and inferring damnation for sinne are decrees of meanes conducing to a certaine end For like as in election God decreeth to bestowe faith repentance and obedience on some and to reward it with everlasting life for the manifestation of his glory in the way of mercy mixt with justice So in Reprobation he decrees to permit others to sinne and finally to persevere therein and to damne them for their sinne to manifest his glory in the way of vindicative justice Now whosoever intends an end must also be the Auhour of the meanes conducing to that end Now God though well he may be the Authour of permission of sinne yet he cannot be the Author of sinne Albeit upon God's permission of sinne it followeth that sinne shall exist Now to permit sinne is all one with denying grace whether it be grace Custodient to preserve from it or grace healing to pardon and cure it after it is committed Now like as the Lord hath mercy on whom he will in pardoning their sinne and healing it by faith and repentance So he hardeneth whom he will by denying faith and repentance So that as God of his mere pleasure grants the grace of faith and repentance unto some so of his mere pleasure he denies it unto others And so in Reprobation he decreeth of his mere pleasure to deny it But albeit the Lord of mere
pleasure proceeds in the denying of faith and repentance whereby alone sinne is cured and so of mere pleasure suffers some finally to persevere in sinne yet in inflicting damnation he doth not carry himselfe of mere pleasure without all respect to men's workes but herein he proceeds according to a law which is this whosoever believeth not and repenteth not shall be damned And like as God damnes noe man but for his finall perseverance in sinne So from everlasting he did decree to damne noe man but for his finall perseverance in sinne So that by vertue of the Divine decree of reprobation sinne and finall perseverance therein is constituted the cause of damnation but by noe meanes is it constituted the cause of the decree of reprobation neither doth the foresight of sinne precede it For first like as upon this doctrine that Grace is not given according unto workes the absolutenesse of predestination is grounded in the judgment of Austine as by necessary consequence issuing there from In like sort upon this that grace is not denied according unto men's workes as necessarily followeth the absolutenesse of Reprobation Secondly looke by what reason the Apostle proves that Election is not of good workes namely because before the children were borne or had done any good it was said the Elder shall serve the Yonger by the same reason it evidently followeth that reprobation is not of evill workes because before they were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the Younger Esau's reprobation being as emphatically signified under his subjection to Iacob his younger as Iacob's election was designed by his dominion over Esau his Elder brother 3. If sinne be the cause of the decree of Reprobation then either of ' its own nature or by constitution divine Not by necessity of nature for undoubtedly God could annihilate men for sinne had it pleased him If by constitution Divine mark what absurdity followeth namely this that God did ordaine that upon foresight of sinne he would ordaine men unto damnation 4. If foresight of sinne precedes the decree of damning them for sin then the decree to permit sin much more precedes the decree to damne them for it as without which there can be noe foresight of sin and consequently permission of sin is first in intention and then damnation and therefore it should be last in execution that is men should first be damned and afterwards permitted to sin to wit in an other world 5. And lastly Reprobation is the will of God but there can be noe cause of God's will as Aquinas hath proved much lesse can a temporall thing be the cause of God's will which is eternall Upon this ground it is that Aquinas professeth Never any man was so mad as to say that any thing might be the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So may I say it were a mad thing to maintaine that any thing can be the cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating For the case is altogether alike the will of God being alike uncapable of a cause in both whereas this Authour saith that God by our opinion doth draw men on by his unconquerable power from sin to sin 't is mere bumbast All men being borne in sin must needs persevere in sin unlesse God gives grace to regenerate them For whether they doe that which is morally good they doe it not in a gracious manner or whether they abstaine from evill they doe it not in a gracious manner He that is of God heareth God's wordes ye therefore heare them not saith our Saviour because ye are not of God Arminius acknowledgeth and Corvinus after him that all men by reason of Adam's sin are cast upon a necessitie of sinning He askes what difference is there in the course which God taketh for the conversion of the Elect and obduration of Reprobates and I have already shewed a vast difference and here in breife I shew a difference He hath mercy on the one in the regenerating them curing the corruption he finds in them he shewes not the like grace to others but leaves them unto themselves as touching the evill acts committed by the one he concurreth as a cause efficient to the act which for the substance of it is naturally good For ens bonum convertuntur every thing that is an entity so farre is good but he hath no efficiency as touching the evill as which indeed can admit no efficiencie as Austin hath delivered of old Man himselfe is only a deficient cause of sin as sin and that in a culpable manner which kind of deficiency is not incident to God But to every good act he concurres two manner of waies that in the nature of a positive efficient cause in both namely to the substance of the act by influence generall and to the goodnesse of it by influence speciall and supernaturall It is true the Fathers made sin the object of prescience not of predestination the reason was because they took predestination to be only of such things which God did effect in time Now sin is none of those things that come to passe by God's effection but only by God's permission And that such was the notion of predestination with the Fathers I prove first out of Austin In sua quae falli mutarique non potest praescientiâ opera sua futura disponere illud omnino nec aliud quidquam est praedestinare In his foreknowledge which can neither be deceived nor changed to dispose his own workes that is to predestinate and nothing else And sin not being the worke of God no marvaile if it come not under predestination Secondly out of the Synod of Valens Praedestinatione autem Deum ea tantum statuisse dicimus quae ipse vel gratuita misericordiâ vel justo judicio facturus erat We say that God by predestination ordained only such things as himselfe would work either of his free mercy or in just judgment Againe it is as true that they made even sin it selfe the Object of God's will witnesse that of Austin Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe but God Allmighty willing it either by permitting it or working it So the eleaventh article of the Church of Ireland So Arminius Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerum implere God would have Ahab to fulfill the measure of his sins So scripture often mentioned And Austin gives the reason of it malum fieri bonū est it is good that evill should be Bellarmine confesseth as much namely that Mala fieri Deo permittente bonum est It is good that evills should come to passe by God's permission And shall not God have liberty to will that which is good When he saith of the Ancients that They refuted this foule assertion of an absolute irresistable and necessitating decree
a thing it is for any man to maintaine that there is some cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So as mad a thing it must be every way to avouch that there is a cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And truely the Apostle St. Paul plainly manifests that upon what ground he proves that Election is not of good works namely because before Iacob or Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said The elder shall serve the younger upon the same ground we may be bold to conclude that Reprobation is not of evill workes And the same reason manifests that faith and infidelity are excluded from being the causes the one of Election the other of Reprobation as well as good and evill workes And both Piscator by evidence of Scripture and Bradwardine by evidence of reason have demonstrated that no will of God is conditionall which is to be understood as touching the act of God willing And it may be evidently further demonstrated thus If any thing be the cause of God's will then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as is evident and all confesse there being no colour of truth for that besides such an opinion were most dangerously prejudiciall to God's soveraignty and liberty If therefore they say it is by the constitution of God maske I pray what an insuperable absurdity followeth hereupon For seing God's constitution is his will it followeth that God did will that upon foresight of this or that he would will such a man's salvation and such a man's damnation And thus the act of God's will is made the Object of God's will even the eternall act of God's will Whereas to the contrary it is apparent that the objects of God's will are things temporall never any thing that is eternall But as touching things willed we readily grant it may be said there is a cause thereof as School-Divines doe generally acknowledge And thus Gerardus Vossius speaks of the conditionall will which he faith the Fathers doe ascribe to God For this is the instance which he gives thereof as for example when God ordaines to bestow salvation on a man in case he believe here faith is made the condition of Salvation but not of the will of God And in like manner we willingly grant that reprobation is conditionall inasmuch as God intends to inflict damnation on none but such as die in sin without repenance But albeit predestination as touching this particular thing willed may be said to be conditionall according as the School-men explicate their meaning and reprobation likewise as touching the particular of dānatiō mētioned yet no such thing cā be truely affirmed either of the one or of the other as touching the particulars of grāting or denying the grace of règeneratiō which are intended also by the decrees of predestinatiō reprobatiō For albeit God intends not to bestow salvation on any but upon condition of faith nor damnation on any but upon condition of finall impenitency and infidelity Yet God intends not to bestow the grace of regeneration on some for the curing of their naturall infidelity and impenitency Nor to leave the same infidelity and impenitency uncured in others by denying the same grace of regeneration unto them This I say God doth not intend to bring to passe upon any condition For if he should then grace should be conferred according unto works which was condemned in the Synod of Palestine and all along in divers Synods and Councells against the Pelagians So that albeit God proceeds according to a law in bestowing salvation and inflicting damnation yet he proceeds according to no law in giving or denying the grace of regeneration for the curing of our naturall corruption but merely according to the pleasure of his will as the Apostle testifies saying He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And if the conferring and denying of this grace be absolute how much more are the decrees hereof to be accounted most absolute And consequently that one man is delivered from the power of his sins whether originall or habituall another is not but still continueth under the power of them This I say doth must needs come to passe by vertue of Gods absolute decrees Yet no absolute necessity followeth hereupon First because no greater necessity then that which is absolute can be attributed to the existence and continuance of God himselfe Secondly God did absolutely decree to make the world yet no wise man was ever known to affirme that the worlds existence was and is by absolute necessity In like sort God did absolutely decree that Iosiah should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar That Cyrus should build his Citty and let goe his captives That no man should desire the Israelites land when they should come to appeare before the Lord their God thrice in the yeare That God would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their children to love the Lord their God withall their heart and with all their soule To put his feare in their hearts that they should never depart away from him To cause them to walke in his statutes and judgments to doe them To worke in them both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure Yea to worke in them every thing that is pleasing in his sight through Iesus Christ Likewise that Absolom should defile his fathers Concubines that the Jewes should crucify the Son of God that some through disobedience should stumble at the word that the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast Yet these actions were done by them as freely as ever they did ought in their lives All these things I say by Scripture evidence were decreed by God to come to passe The good by God's effection the evill by God's permission and decreed absolutely on their parts that did them if not let it be shewed upon what condition on Absolon's part he should defile his fathers Concubines upon what condition on the Jewes part they should crucify the Son of God upon what condition on their part others through disobedience should stumble at God's word And upon what condition on their part the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast And if they take Arminias his way let them reply upon mine answere to Arminius if Bellarmin's let them reply upon my answer to Bellarmine that we may not trouble the world with out Tautologies If a different way from both these I shall be glad to be acquainted with it give it such entertainement as according to my judgment it shall be found to deserve So that with Epiphanius though we are ready to concurre in denying destiny which as before we heard out of him was a necessity derived from the starres yet with Austin we may still hold that the wills of men need not to be exempted from all necessity to maintaine the liberty
to begin with the examination of those Arguments against the absolutenesse of Divine Reprobation which M r Mason and M r Hord tooke to be of a convincing nature by which Method in Reading thou wilt the sooner meet with that abundant satisfaction which this worke will yeeld as touching this controversy unto all that are capable or desirous thereof THE FIRST PART CONTAINING A CONSIDERATION of those Reasons for which M r HORD as he pretended first Questioned THE TRUTH OF ABSOLVTE REPROBATION OXFORD Printed by L. L. Printer to the University for T. R. Anno 1653. THIS TREATISE DIVIDES IT SELFE INTO TWO PARTS Viz. 1. An Introduction 2. A Discourse I. The Introduction SECTION I. SIR I Have sent you here the Reasons which have moved me to change my Opipion in some Controversies of late debated between the Remonstrants and their Opposites I doe the rather present them unto you 1. That I may shew the due respect which I beare your Worship with my forwardnes to answer your desires as I can with regard to Conscience 2. That you may see I dissent not without cause but have Reason on my side 3. That if I can be convinced that my Grounds are weake and insufficient I may think better of my Opinion which I have forsaken then I can for the present In the delivery of my Motives I shall proceed in this Order 1 I will state the Opinion which I dislike 2 I will lay down my reasons against it Touching the first your Worship knowes these two things very well 1 That the main 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Question in these Controversies and that on which all the rest hang is What the decrees of God are touching the everlasting condition of men and how they are Ordered 2. That the Men which have disputed these things may be reduced to two sorts or sides The first side affirmes that there is such an absolute decree proceeding from the good pleasure of God alone without the consideration of mens finall Unbeliefe and Impenitency as by which he casteth men off from Grace and Glory and shuts up the farr greater part of men even of those that are called by the Preaching of the Gospel to Repentance and Salvation under invincible and unavoydable sin and damnation The other side disavowing any such decree say that the Decree of God to cast off men for ever is grounded upon the foresight of their continuance in sin and unbeliefe both avoydable by Grace and consequently inferring no mans damnation necessary TWISSE Consideration WOrthy Sir according to your desire to take into Consideration this writing directed unto you at length I have gotten some leasure from other imployments to addresse my selfe to give you satisfaction in this particular 1 That I may shew my selfe answerable to that respect which you have deserved at my hands and not so only but to my zeale of Gods truth which hath deserved much more at the hands of us both 2 That you may the better discern which of us two whom you put to conferre doth maintain the cause of Gods truth and hath the best reasons on his side As for the change of Opinion here mentioned such Professions are nothing strange But whether such a Profession be in truth or in pretence and rather liberty taken to manifest that Opinion which formerly hath been cherished as also with what conscience voyd of all carnall respects such a change or manifestation is made it belongs not unto us to judge but to leave that unto God who tryeth the hearts and reynes Sure we are the heart of man is full of deceitfulnesse both to deceive others yea and to deceive our selves the more need there is to be jealous over our selves and to carry a watchfull eye over our own soules and whether we have chang'd a former way or at the first chose one or other way and continue to imbrace that whereof we have been at first informed not to despise but in the feare of God to practice that holy counsell of the Apostle given to the Corinthians a famous Church and such as were destitute of no spirituall gift Prove your selves whether you are in the Faith examine your selves know ye not your own selves that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be Reprobates as also to consider how indifferently we carry our selves in using means to inform our selves in the way of truth and whether they be not such as doe discover our chiefe care hath been to bring our judgements about to the imbracing of that way whether Truth or Errour which formerly we did effect Certaine it is that Heresies must be and that to this end that they that are approved may be made manifest And Illusions shall have their course when the truth of God is not imbraced with love whatsoever be the pretence of our disaffecting it whether harshnes to affections or discrepancy to carnall reason And when such judgements have their course Who are priviledged from being seduced Let our Saviour speake in this So that if it were possible men should deceive the very elect Upon what may we be assured to stand firme in time of such temptation Let the Apostle answer us in this when after the effectuall working of Satan in them that perish he comes neere to them to whom he writes in the way of comfort thus But we ought to give thankes alway to God for you Brethren beloved of the Lord because that God hath from the beginning chosen you unto salvation through sanctification of the spirit and faith of the truth Like as before he did conclude unto himselfe their election from observation of the work of their Faith the labour of their Love and the patience of their Hope And the greater is the comfort which hereby is ministred unto us the greater should be our care to informe our selves aright in the doctrine thereof and especially to have an eye unto it that we doe not shape it in such a manner that like as it is impossible we should have any assurance thereof so it will prove equally impossible we should draw any comfort from thence 1. But is it so as here it is put upon you that you knew very well indeed that the main 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Question in these Controversies and that on which all the rest hang is What the decrees of God are touching the everlasting condition of men and how they are ordered I assure you if you knew this you know more then I doe I had thought rather that the resolution of the Point concerning Predestination had depended upon the resolution of the Point touching Grace efficacious then the contrary As namely if Faith be confessed to be the gift of God and that not with respect to any thing in man it followeth herehence that Predestination unto faith and reprobation from faith must proceed mecrely upon the good pleasure of God and not upon foresight of ought in man There was a time when Austin
pag. 710. Cùm de praedestinatione sermo habetur inde exordiendum esse constantèr semper docui atquè hodiè doceo jure in more relinqui omnes reprobos qui in Adam mortui sunt atquè damnati As for Beza I know full well he maintained that man not created is the object of Predestination but can this Author represent unto us any place out of Beza wherein he should affirme that God doth decree to damne any man but for sin or that damnation is the end that God intends in the decree of Predestination to death In his Questions and Answers he professeth the contrary pag. 111. Postremò non dixi exitium istorum he speaks of Reprobates esse finem deo decernenti propositum sed gloriam ipsius Nequè etiam simpliciter dixi istos esse exitio destinatos sed justo exitio destinatos dixi And in his Book De aeternâ Dei Praedestinatione contrà Sebastian Castell ad argument Castell 2. pag. 346. Quamobrem etiam illud quoquè probavimus nos ita loqui non solere quanquam à Deo simpliciter conditum dicamus ad perditionem sed idcircò ut ipsius justa condemnatione Dominus justitiam suam patefaciat As for Zanchy Peter Baro that caused such perturbation in Cambridge about this very argument he denyes this to have been the opinion of Zanchy In summa trium de Praedestinatione sententiarum his words are these Altera sententia est Augustini posterior etiam Sohnii Heydelbergensis Theologiae Professoris aliorum quorundam Protestantium ut Zanchii atquè etiam Bellarmini qui omnes priorem illam improbant in hoc inter se consentientes ut sit praedestinatio ab Adami tantum lapsu accipienda And as touching Piscator he handles the question about the object of Predestination in a small Treatise annexed to an answer of his to Hemingius De Universali Gratiâ and inquires whether the obiect thereof be Humanum genus nondum conditum or conditum but nondum corruptum or both conditum and corruptum and his resolution is that in the decree of Predestination there is place for all these considerations according to three severall acts comprised therein which I have formerly mentioned and so drawes into one all three opinious As touching Gomarus in the last place I have seen little or nothing of his but when Lubbertus in his Book Ad 99 Errores Conradi Vorstii pag. 807. had professed Massam consideratam esse a Deo non ut integram sed ut corruptam and was charged by Vostius as delivering that which was contrary to the doctrine of Calvin Beza and Gomarus he replies that herein he doth not contradict them but saith he Illorum dict a quae quibusdam asperiuscula videntur lenio in commodissimum sensum interpretor But be it so that all of them made Humanum genus not corruptum no nor integrum but nondum conditum the object of reprobation I am of their mind that doe so and was not D r Whitaker also whom very wisely this Author conceales This renowned Professor in the University of Cambridge in a Publique exercise his Concio ad Clerum professeth what Paul speaks De luto sigulo non posse melius exponi quà m de Massâ incorruptâ and that Bucer understands it thus Bucerus per Massam intelligit primam humani ganeris originem ex quá homo conditus à Deo fabricatus est And he disputes at large that there is no cause of reprobation and that neither sin actuall nor sin originall is the cause thereof and professeth this to be the Opinion of the Church of England And though now a daies we be upbraided as if we had learned it of Papists and Schoole Divines this great light of Cambridge spares not to make honourable mention of Schoolemens sollid discourse on this point saying Hanc sententiam Scholastici si ullam egregiè solideque pertractarum praeserùm qui insigniores sanioresque habiti sunt Lombardus ait ut praedestinationis nulla merita sunt ità nec reprobationis Now the doctrine which he saith the Schoolemen handle so solidly as none more is the very doctrine which this Author seems here to impugne as when he saith some make the will of God without any consideration of sin in men originall or actuall to be the cause of their eternall Rejection for D r Whitaker expresseth it thus His igitur isto modo explicatis sequitur tertiam opinionem solummodò necessario veram esse aequè reprobationis ac praedestinationis causam esse dei voluntatem quandoquidem providentiae divinae munus est omnia ad fines istos certa ratione certisque mediis ordinare Only as touching the end here mentioned That so he might shew his absolute and unlimited power and dominion over them in appointing to heaven or hell whom he pleaseth that I find not in D r Whitaker He saith plainly that God predestinated unto death whom he would and because he would Deus igitur ad mortem praedestinavit quos voluit quia voluit which phrase I willingly confesse I like not so well but that the end thereof is to manifest his absolute and unlimited dominion and power he saith not and Beza in the places before mentioned referres it to the manifestation of Gods justice as the end thereof And like as he saith certissimum est damnationem nunquam nisi propter Peccatum infligi so I should think it nothing lesse certain that God doth not ordaine any man to be damned but for sin especially cosidering that damnation in the notion thereof hath an essential reference to sin Now since I have found such a Champion as D r Whitaker for the maintenance of this Tenent have I cause to feare the sharp censures of any professors in the Country Were he alive I presume he would be nothing skarred with the imputation of making God the Prime and Principall cause of mens everlasting ruine he would I think require a little more learning in the Criminator then to expresse himselfe so crudely For without all question God is the prime and principall cause nay the sole cause of mans everlasting ruine in genere causae efficient is though this excludes not a meritorious cause of his own damnation on the creatures part as D r Whitaker professeth in the words formerly alleadging acknowledged Damnationem infligi propter Peccatum And farther I am apt to conceive and have undertaken to justify and that to the view of the World that albeit mankind not created be the only object of predestination and reprobation yet no mans reprobation is made by God citra considerationem Peccati in as much as I hold that the decrees of creation permission of sin and of finall perseverance therein and lastly of damnation for sin are not decrees subordinate but coordinate and simultaneous as being decrees concerning means tending to the same end which is the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of vindicative justice
so Gods grace preserved him from such excesse but that the Ministers Tiberius set about them did more provoke them by exasperating courses then God did in like manner provoke Ionah it doth not appeare but had Ionah hereupon broken forth into blasphemies had Ionah's sinne been excusable or Gods course blameable Revel 16. 21. we read of a great hayle that fell upon the men like Talents out of heaven and men blaspheamed God because of the plague of the hayle for the plague thereof was exceeding great And Isai 8. 21. The Lord prophecyeth that He that is afflicted and famished shall goe to and fro and when he shall be hungry he shall even fret himselfe and curse his King and his Gods and look upward such plagues are the work of God for there is no evill in the citty but the Lord hath done it Amos 3. But let them look unto it that thereupon take occasion to blaspheme And Tentatio probationis was never yet that I know denyed unto God to try whether they will blaspheme God or no. To this end Satan desired to have an hand on Job yet not so much to try whether he would blaspheme or no but being confident he should bring him to blaspheme Job 1. 11. stretch out now thine hand and touch all that he hath and he will curse thee to thy face The Lord gave him leave and Job acknowledgeth the Lords hand in all that Satan did saying The Lord gave and the Lord takes away yet in all this Job sinned not nor charged God foolishly Satan desires yet farther liberty saying skin for skin yea all that a man hath will he give for his life But put forth thy hand now and touch his bone and his flesh and he will curse thee to thy face And the Lord said unto Satan Behold he is in thy hand but save his life So went Satan forth from the presence of the Lord and smote Job with sore boyles from the sole of his foot unto his crowne and he took him a potshard to scrape himselfe withall and he sate down among the ashes Then said his Wife unto him Doest thou yet continue in thy integrity Curse God and dye She manifested the inward corruption of her irreligious heart Job might have brought her to a forme of godlines by his pious courses in his family but litle power of godlinesse doth appeare upon her For as Solomon saith If thou faint in the day of adversity thy strength is small It seems her heart was sowred with Atheisme thinking the world was governed by chance rather then by divine providence and consequently it was all one whether a man did blesse God or curse God and a madnesse to make a conscience of walking in integrity and that in Iobs case at this time whether he did blesse God he must dye or whether he did curse God he could but dye and better it was for him thus impoverished thus afflicted to dye then to live as for the powers of the world to come it seems she never had but a tast of them and that tast never produced any true faith in her concerning them Here was a sore temptation the very gates of hell playing upon him with their greatest Ordinance to batter if it were possible his shield of faith But what is Iobs answer Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh What shall we receive good at the hand of God and shall we not receive evill In all this did not Iob sin with his lips The worke of Satan in the impoverishing of Iobs estate and afflicting his person cannot be denied to be Gods work As for the work of his wife why might not that be the work of God as well as the work of Satan For did not Satan sin in all this As our Saviour saith that he was a murtherer from the beginning and as S t Peter saith The devill goes about like a roring Lyon seeking whom he may devoure so who can make doubt but these courses practised against Iob were fruits of his murthering and devouring disposition And all sides now a daies confesse that the act of the most flagitious sin committed by man or Angell is the work of God in the way of a principall efficient cause as well as it is the work of the creature And as for the sinfulnesse of the act either of the Devill or his Wife that was not it which did or could hurt Iob but the works wrought by Satan the temptation atheisticall proposed by his Wife this was the greatest danger in the consideration thereof to corrupt his soule for that is it alone that workes upon the will to incline it And as for their sinning herein that proceeded from the want of Gods feare according to that of Abraham Genes 20. 10. I said surely the feare of God is not in this place therefore they will slay me for my Wives sake And albeit God engageth himselfe towards some for the putting of his feare in their hearts that they shall never depart away from him Ierim 36. 40. yet he hath not engaged himselfe thus farre towards all For the Apostle plainly professeth that He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. and hardning we know is denying the feare of God either as touching the habituall infusion thereof or as touching the actuall excitation thereof after it is infused Yet I deny not but obduration and excaecation are sometimes promiscuously used the one for the other because of the strict conjunction that is betwixt them And as touching the particular act of Convitiation Austin spares not to professe that even when it is committed by man it is brought forth by God out of his secret providence lib. 9. Confess cap. 8. Quid egisti Deus meus unde curasti unde sanasti nonne protulisti durum acutum ex alterâ animâ convitium tanquam medicinale ferrum ex occultis provisionibus tuis uno ictu putredinem illam praecidisti And whereas Bellarmine endeavoureth to blast the evidence of this place giving testimony unto Gods secret providence in evill I have endeavoured to shew the vanity of his discourse in my Vind. Grat. Dei lib. 2. Crim. 3. digress 2. cap. 13. And in what congruity can it be said that God bid Shimei to curse David but that in the same analogy of faith it may be said that God bid Iobes Wife in this manner to tempt him And which of the two was the greatest provocation Tiberius his Ministers Provocation of Drusus and Nero or Shimei's provocation of David rayling on him to his face the Subject blaspheaming his Prince undoubtedly the provocation was nothing inferior only here was the difference Tiberius gave such commandment to his Ministers so to provoke Drusus and Nero God gave no such commandement in proper speech unto Shimei but rather commanded the contrary in his law Thou shalt not speak evill of the ruler of thy people But Gods secret providence whereby he
makes use of all his creatures in what condition soever he finds them even of Devills and wicked men to serve his turne by them either in the way of judgement or in the way of mercy and sometimes for triall of the faith and patience of his children is in Scripture phrase called Gods bidding or commanding And indeed it is farre more effectuall then his commandment And Austin by pregnant passages of holy Scripture convicted of this truth spareth not to professe as much in these words His talibus testimoniis divinorum eloquiorum quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est satis quantum existimo manifestatur operari Deum in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunquè voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ sive ad mala pro meritis eorum judicio utique suo aliquando aperto aliquando occulto semper autem justo De Grat. lib. Arbitr cap. 21. And touching this particular case of Shimei inquiring about the interpretation of it see I pray how he resolves concerning it Quomodo dixerit dominus huic homini maledicere David Quis sapiens intelliget Non enim jubendo dixit ubi obedientia laudaretur sed quod ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo occulto inclinavit Ideò dictum est dixit ei dominus Nam si jubenti obtemper asset Deo laudandus potius quam puniendus esset sicut ex hoc peccato posteà novimus esse punitum And he proceeds farther to shew the reason of this divine providence Nec causa tacita est cur ei Deus justo modo dixerit maledicere David hoc est Cor ejus malum in hoc peccatum miserit vel dimiserit ut videat inquit dominus humilitatem meam retribuat mihi bona pro maledictio ejus in die isto And hereupon concludes Ecce quomodo probatur Deum uti cordibus etiam malorum ad laudem atque adjumentum bonorum Sic usus est Iuda tradente Christum Sic usus est Iudaeis crucifigentibus Christum quanta inde bona praestitit populis credituris Qui ipso utitur diabolo pessimo sed optimè ad excercendam probandam fidem pietatem bonorum non sibi quia omnia scit antequam fiant sed nobis quibus erat necessarium ut eo modo ageretur nobiscum But let us proceed to provocations unto other sins not in the way of exasperation but in the way of allurements Achan was a covetous person at the sacking of Jericho it was his hap to light among the spoyle upon a goodly Babylonish garment and two hundred shekells of silver and a wedge of gold of fifty shekells waight Was not so faire a prey a sore temptation to a covetous person How was Demosthenes taken with a rich bowle that was shewed him by Harpalus but there was great danger in it I confesse yet if desire of prey doth sometimes overrun the sent may it not as well overcome the feare of danger especially considering the opportunity of secrecy to convey it closely into his Tent and hide it there I saw saith he and I coveted them and took them and behold they lye hid in the earth in the midst of my Tent and the silver under it Now can it be denied but that God by his providence brought him into this temptation and consequently into this provocation for to tempt is to provoke 1 Chron. 21. 1. And is it not just with God to bring any man into such temptations of what kind or in what degree soever seeing no temptation or provocation in this kind or degree bereaves a man of the liberty of his will If not what meant our Saviour to teach his Disciples and in them us to pray unto God that He will not lead us into temptation And what cause hath Achan to complaine of this temptation We do not read he did was it not the condition of many others as well as himselfe Was this prey that he ceazed on the only spoyle of that great Citty Were there no Babylonish garments but that one no more silver or wedges of gold but that Achan lighted on Yet they refrained some out of the feare of God that restrained them in a gracious manner and kept them from sinning against him others though not out out of a feare of God yet out of the feare of punishment were moved to beware how they transgressed For albeit Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia as * Austin writes yet feare of punishment oftimes restraines from committing capitall crimes though this restraint be not gracious and considerations of lesse force then these doe prevaile many times with carnall men both to abstain from evill and to doe that which is good though not in a gracious manner As we read in the Gospell of a wicked Judge that neither feared God nor reverenced man yet he would doe the Widdow justice to ease himselfe of her importunate sollicitations where with she molested him Come we to provocations unto sinne of another nature in satisfying the concupiscence of the flesh David arising out of his bed at eventide and walking upon the roof of the Kings Pallace from the roofe he saw a Woman washing her selfe and the Woman was very beautifull to look upon we know what followed hereupon Now was it not God that lead him into this temptation into this provocation Surely if this were not just with God it were in vaine for us to pray that God will not lead us into temptation for we need not feare any such temptation which cannot befall us without violation of Gods justice in the course of his providence Paul the Apostle least he should be exalted out of measure through the abundance of revelations made unto him which were very dangerous to puff a man up and make him swell in the conceit of his own worthinesse being admitted into the secrets of God was sometimes exercised with a thorne in the flesh the messenger of Satan sent to buffet him But the feare of God was alive in him and stirred up his faith to pray unto God three times that it might depart from him and the Lord made him a gracious answer not as yet to deliver him but to support him in this conflict and give him the victory over it For the Lord said unto him my grace is sufficient for thee for my power is made perfect in thy weaknesse This answer put heart into Paul Therefore saith he will I very gladly rejoyce rather in mine infirmities that the power of Christ may dwell in me Mark I pray Rahter in mine infirmities He would not blame God for thus exercising him but rather rejoyce to be thus exercised for as much as this same should doe him no harme for by vertue of Christs power dwelling in him he should have the victory Secondly it should doe him good in preserving him from being exalted
naturall and carnall men and therein they doe abstaine from the committing of it freely And yet we say that even in abstaining from these acts they doe not abstaine from sinne for as much as they doe not abstaine from them in a gracious manner and all by reason of that originall corruption which remaines uncured in them untill such time as God who hath mercy on whom he will is pleased to cure it by the grace of regeneration 3. But because I imagine this Author le ts fly at randome and keeps not himselfe to the precise genius of the Tenent by him impugned but rather aimeth at our doctrine concerning providence divine and the decree of God according whereunto we willing professe with Austin that Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit Enchir. 95. Therefore I answere in the third Place That the necessity following upon this will of God is nothing prejudiciall to the liberty or contingency of second agents in their severall operations Although I am not ignorant that now a daies it is the common and glorious course of our Adversaries very confidently to presume and presuppose that upon the will of God passing upon the action of the creature there followeth a necessity standing in flat opposition to the liberty of rationall agents and no marvail for sic factitavit Hercules Arminius the great Champion of their cause his learning served him to doe so before them As if the contumelious usages of our Saviour by Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israel were not performed freely but by meer necessity opposite to liberty For it cannot be denied but that all these were gathered together against the holy sonne of God to doe what Gods hand and Gods counsel had predestinated to be done Acts 4. 28. And in like sort they that through disobedience stumbled at the word of God did not freely disobey the Word because Peter professeth of them in expresse termes that Hereunto they were ordained And after the same manner it is to be conceived of the Kings that gave their Kingdomes to the Beast namely that they did it not freely in as much as the Holy Ghost saith that God put into their hearts to fulfill his will and to consent and give their Kingdome to the Beast Yet the Church of Ireland in their Articles set forth by as good Authority as the Articles of the Church of England Art 11. having professed that God from all eternity did by his unchangeable counsel ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe to prevent such like objections as this Author fashioneth forthwith adde Yet so as thereby no violence is offered to the willes of reasonable creatures and neither the liberty nor the contingency of second causes is taken away but established rather And Austin in his Book De Grat. Liber Arbitr where he speaks as freely of Gods effectuall Providence working in evill as no where more in so much as our Adversaries take great exceptions against his speeches such as formerly delivered and that in expresse termes His main drift notwithstanding and scope in that Book is to prove that notwithstanding the divine operation in working the motion of the creature as he thinks good yet is the creature never a whit the lesse free in its own operation And indeed where grace is wanting there is too much will rather then too little unto that which is evill according to that he writes also elsewhere Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia And if Gods operation prejudiceth not the liberty of the creature much lesse the will of God For though not any thing comes to passe unlesse God willeth it whether it be good or evill yet with this difference as Austin in the same place professeth He will have that which is good come to passe by the effecting of it but evill only by his permitting of it Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo But though Austin and the Church of Ireland yea and the Word of God teacheth this yet the Tragaedian as this Author saith could see the contrary that is perceive the evidence of the contrary which none of these saw And is not this a pretty Comaedy that a Tragaedian and Zeno's servant must be brought in and that in a confidentiary supposition to out face not Divines only both antient and late but the very word of God For it is as clear forsooth that what comes to passe by the will of God and by the effectuall operation of God doth not come to passe freely and consequently that the doctrine which maintaines that evill comes to passe by the will of God as the crucifying of Christ by the predestination of God or by the operation of God as the Rent of the ten Tribes from the two and the hardning of Pharaoh's heart so as not to let Israel goe God professeth to be his work takes away all conscience of sinne All this I say is as cleare if we believe this Author as that Seneca's Tragaedies are the Oracles of God And I pray consider must it not take away as well all conscience of righteousnesse whether of faith or of repentance or of obedience unlesse we deny faith to be the gift of God repentance to be the gift of God unles we deny that God is he Who makes us perfect to every good work working in us that which is pleasing in his sight that God is he that putteth his own spirit in us and causeth us to walke in his statutes and to keep his judgements and doe them Yet what doth Seneca speak of the divine will or divine operation Did the Tragaedian under the terme of Fate denote the divine decree or the divine administration of things which is plentifully revealed to us in the word of God Austin I am sure thought otherwise in more places then one in Psalm 31. on these words Pronunciabo adversum me He blames those who when they are found in their sinnes say Fatum mihi fecit stellae meae fecêrunt But saith he Quid est fatum Quae sunt stellae certè istae quas in Coelo conspicimus Qui eas fecit Deus Quis eas ordinavit Deus ergo vides quod voluisti dicere Deus fecit ut peccarem Then he tells of others who said that Mars facit Homicidam Venus Adulterum So that Fatum with them were second causes which we all know in their operations doe both work by necessity of nature and have no power to maintain the free will of man and in Psalm 91. Quaeris ab illo quid sit Fatum dicit stellae malae Quaeris ab illo quis fecit stellas quis ordinavit stellas non habet quid tibi respondeat nisi Deus It 's true indeed the Pelagians did object the Stoicall Fate unto Austin as if his doctrine favoured of it and what doth he answer thereunto Nec
at first fight and much more by the distinction following of Gratia sufficiens efficax which he so well perceived that he is content to clap it upon Austins back to beare the burthen of it and puts it but upon adventure that it may prove to be the Scripture meaning And in like sort when pag. 98. having proposed two things to be necessarily unfolded by him Primò de Gratiâ sufficiente efficaci Secundo de utriusque dispensatione dispensationisque Causis He leaves off there giving it over in plain ground What doth this argue but that he manifestly perceived he was not able in any tollerable manner to shape this distinction in congruity to his own Tenent Let this Author well consider this that talkes so much of our Divines unwillingnesse to come to tryall in the poynt of reprobation When Arminius durst not adventure upon the explicating of his own opinion touching the distinction of grace sufficient and effectuall and in giving us the definition of each The like to have been the course of other Arminians I have known declining the point of effectuall grace as a precipice and breakneck unto them And when others have been put upon it they have placed it in the grace subsequent and have not been ashamed to make it consist in this that God by effectuall grace doth work in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle credere modo velit and why not as well that he workes in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credere modo Credat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Resipiscere modo Resipiscat This that I speake I can shew under the hand of one of them a great stickler for the Arminian Cause great I say in respect of affection not of judgement And I have cause to conceive that both this Authors Discourse and that others I have had to deale withall is but as a smoake that for a great part if not for the most of it comes out of the same Chimney 4. Let the argument stand as it doth let infidelity by Gods permission follow upon the decree of damnation and that necessarily Yet consider 1. Gods permitting of it is no other then the leaving of it uncured not that hereby infidelity followeth which was not before but being in all before as the fruit of that naturall corruption wherein all were borne as all confesse as many as concurre against the Pelagians in acknowledging Originall sinne By Gods permission of it it continueth to be uncured What actuall sinne is there in the World or habituall sinne arising thereupon which God cannot cure if it please him If then he will not cure it in some shall it not be lawfull for him to punish it where he findes the continuance of it unto the end without breaking off by repentance 2. Suppose all men had power to doe any good thing if God will not give them Velle quod possunt as Austin saith he dealt with Adam in his innocency and gave the Angels that stood amplius Adjutorium then he gave the others whereby it came to passe that they stood in obedience when the other fell what shall wee say in this case is it possible that they should Velle bonum if God will not work it in them of whom the Apostle professeth that he works in us both the Will and the Deed Or shall wee hereupon say they doe not sinne freely What shift have they to avoyd this but either by contradicting the Apostle and saying God doth not work in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle or by saying that God doth work in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle modò Velimus as plain a contradiction as ever proceeded from the mouth of any The selfe same act being made before and after it self for the condition is allwaies before the thing conditioned And is this to work in us the Will according to Gods pleasure or according to mans good pleasure What is it to say that grace is given according unto works if this be not 3. We deny that any evill act therefore comes not to passe freely because it comes to passe necessarily upon supposition of Gods denyall of grace to refraine from it For like as good works are not therefore not wrought freely by us because God by his grace workes us to the performance of them For who dares deny that it is in Gods power to make us work this or that freely in like sort and much more evill works are not done the lesse freely because God denies speciall and effectuall grace to abstain from them For want of grace doth not take away willingnesse unto that which is evill but leaves too much rather in man of that kind As Austin saith that Libertas sine gratiâ non est libertas sed contumacia Now where there is contumacy there is rather too much will then too little For Contumacy is Wilfulnesse 4. The Schooles teach that liberty of will consists only in electione mediorum in the election of means to certain ends Now when the Gospel is preached to a carnall man whose ends are only carnall as the Apostle saith Philip. 3. 20. They mind earthly things so farre forth as he shall find it serviceable to his carnall ends he may believe it and make profession of it as many times Hypocrites doe and sometimes in such sort as it is hard to distinguish between a true and an Hypocriticall professour This moved the Apostle to exhort the Corinthians famous for their faith to examine themselves and prove themselves Whether they were in the faith that is in faith unfaigned For there is not only a grosse Hypocrisy whereunto a mans own heart is privy but a secret Hypocrisy whereof the man himselfe is nothing conscious yet such a faith undoubtedly is performable by a naturall man Now when a man rejects the Gospell the faith and profession whereof he finds nothing serviceable to his carnall ends doth he not judiciously and deliberately yea and wisely too according to the wisdome of flesh and bloud reject it 5. Austin professeth Lib. 1. De Gen. contr Manich. cap. 3. That all men may believe if they will and justifies it in his Retractations But if the will of man be corrupt and averse from believing We justly say such a man cannot believe as our Saviour saith How can you believe that receive honour one of another and seeke not the honour that cometh of God alone Joh. 5. 44. yet this is an impotency Morall only which is to be distinguished from impotency Naturall For notwithstanding this it may be truely said that All men may believe if they will and herein consists the naturall liberty of the will The Morall liberty consists rather in a sanctified inclination unto that which is good whereby it is freed from the power of sinne and Sathan then in a power to doe good if they will and not otherwise But I never find that Arminians doe distinguish these 6. It is not sufficient for Arminians to conclude that such a
both Utenbogard on the one side and Festus Hommius on the other side to consider of a course how these stirres might be pacified To which motion Festus Hommius makes answer that in case the Remonstrants differed from the Churches only in five Articles he could think of a course whereby some peace might be made in the interim untill a Nationall Synod were gathered This is the more observeable because this Author layeth all the cause of those uproares as he calls them upon Reprobation But he professeth they had great cause to suspect the Remonstrants differed from them in greater points of moment And these are afterwards declared to be these Fol. 14. pag. 1. De perfectâ Christi pro peccatis Satisfactione de Justificatione hominis corà m Deo de Fide Salvificâ de Peccato Originali de Certitudine salutis de Perfectione hominis in hâc vitâ And whereas they desired the Remonstrants would deale clearly and make known what their opinion was in those poynts Utenbogard having laboured to have a hearing before the States alone There traduceth the actions of his Brethren in demanding the Declaration of their minds hereupon as if this were to bring in a new kind of Inquisition amongst them not to be endured And hereupon obtaines of the States that no such Declaration should be required at their hands And more then that finding the Deputies of the Synode by their continuall sollicitations with the States as it well became them in their places to be most prejudiciall to their proceedings they brought it so to passe that like as formerly their Annuall Synods were hindered so now it was forbidden to the Deputies themselves thenceforth to take any such stile unto them or performe any such office as whereabout they were then imployed And so the Relator proceeds in setting downe their insolent courses untill at length perceiving that by the mediation of the King of Great Brittaine all for the most part inclined to the convocation of a Nationall Synod they fell plainly on upon these desperate Counsells openly professing that the calling of a Nationall Councell would prove prejudiciall to the Majesty and Liberty of the Provinces manifesting themselves hereby utterly averse from such a course which yet hath been most in use in the Church of God and that of ancient times for the pacifying of contentions arising in matter of Religion I professe I nothing affect to spend time in such searches and relations I had rather imploy it another way but you see I am driven unto it to represent the unshamefased condition of this Narration 4. And whereas he saith It was accused with open mouth and challenged of falshood it is apparent that the Remonstrants would very well have rested contented with a mutuall toleration of one another in their severall waies For when Utenbogard and Festus Hommius were to meet together and treat upon some faire course of composition Utenbogard together with those of his side professed they knew no other course for setling peace but my mutually tolerating one the other Festus Hommius and others with him on the other side professed they knew no better course then convocation of a Nationall Synode and in the interim to tolerate one another provided they would declare themselves to differ from the received doctrine in the Church in no other points then in the five Articles But how they carried themselves herein refusing to declare themselves I have formerly shewed And farther in the pursuit of this their practice to enjoy toleration it is farther storied by what means they procured a Letter from King James to farther them therein and after that an Edict to that purpose from some of the States And consider farther If any amongst us should rise up and confederate themselves and impugne any five Articles of the Church of England and accuse us for maintaining erronious doctrine therein and challenge us for falshood if they doe it with never so open mouth shall this be sufficient to justify them and condemne us if wee doe not come to a tryall with them to dispute the case though Wee are the Possessours They the Intruders and Innovators Wee maintaining no other Doctrine then that which is by Authority established amongst us and They which impugne the doctrine received are they not usually judged amongst us as such who are rather to be censured then disputed with And withall consider that this mutua tolerantia which the Remonstrants so much pressed and were so glad to enjoy was with greatest instance stood for long after the Conference at the Hague Lastly how often was Arminius himselfe questioned and called upon to give satisfaction for his Heterodoxies and how often did he decline it When at the first Motion was made for his surrogation into the place of Iunius beind deceased then the suspicions of his Heterodox breaking forth and they of Amsterdam not well likeing to let him goe from them amongst whom at that time he exercised his Ministry and that because they observed his luxuriant and novelizing Wit which was like to breed dangerous effects in an University at length upon the great instance both of Utenbogard and Arminius himselfe way was made for him unto the Chayre upon condition he should conferre with Gomarus upon some chief heads of Doctrine and by a round declaration of his mind thereon remove all suspicion of Heterodoxy having formerly by a solemne Protestation given his word that in case he had any singular opinion of his own he would not spread it Hereupon he made open profession that he condemned the chiefe Pelagian opinions concerning grace naturall the strength of Free-will Originall sinne the perfection of man in this life and Predestination and that he approved all those disputes which Austin and other Fathers had written against them and that in his judgement the Pelagian errours were rightly refuted by those Fathers and withall promised that he would teach nothing that differed from the received Doctrine of the Churches and hereupon he was admitted to a Professors place in the University In the beginning whereof he laboured by all means to quench all suspicion of Heterodoxy in himselfe and maintained the doctrine of the Reformed Churches De satisfactione Christi de Fide justificante de justificatione per fidem de Perseverantiâ verè fidelium de Certitudine salutis de Perfectione hominis in hac vitâ c. all which he afterwards contradicted as also did his Followers This I say he then at the first maintained publiquely contrà sententiam suam which let every man judge whether it be not as much as to say against his own Conscience and Corvinus is alleaged as in a certain Writing of his set forth in Low-Dutch ingeniously professing as much Praefat in Synod Dordracen Authoritate Ordinum Fol. 2. p. 1. But after he had been a yeare or two in the place he begins to unmaske himselfe and by his Publique Lectures and chiefly by his dealing with his Schollers in private his heterodoxy
professe as formerly mentioned and charge us to our face that we have learned this doctrine of ours out of the Writings of Papists And Grevincovius against Amesius spares not to pronounce that They may with better credit follow the Jesuits then Wee the Dominicans considering that the Dominicans are the great Administrators of the Inquisition in Spaine This is delivered as touching the poynt of grace and Free-will but as touching the poynt of election and reprobation absolute I can shew under the hand of an Arminian that herein there is no materiall difference between the Dominicans and most part of the Jesuits so little difference there is between the Gratia Praedeterminans of the one and the Gratia Congrua of the other So that if this be true it is not probable that hereby we scandalize the judicious and learned Papists and what those other Churches are which we scandalize excepting Churches Lutheran either this Author knows not or is well content to dissemble it to wit the Churches of Socinians and Anabaptists And how doe we more scandalize the Churches Lutheran herein then they scandalize us Was it ever known that by meer differing in Opinion from other Churches Christian men were said to scandalize them Or if it were so must not the scandall in this case be equall on both sides As for the leaving many of our own very ill satisfied why should that seem strange What doth Carryer write of many well known to him in this our Church of England of the same mind with himselfe some Papists some Lutherans And may there not be as many amongst the Lutherans as ill satisfied with the doctrine commonly received amongst them save that they are farre more forward to excommunicate all such as soon as they appeare then Wee Besides all this The poynt of scandall is brought in very unseasonably For if it be a truth that we maintain and professe if any are scandalized by it it is a scandall taken not given God forbid we should grow so profane as to account it a scandalous thing to make profession of Gods truth especially this truth we maintain being so neere to a cleare opposition to Pelagianisme a Heresy condemned by the Church above 1200 years agoe When Frederick Duke of Woortenberg exhorted his Divines to acknowledge Beza and his Company for Brethren and to declare it by giving them their hands The answer of refusall was made by Jacobus Andreas a most bitter enimy and one whom Beza describes tanquam virum sanguinarium and his carriage throughout was most imperious And it becomes an Arminian spirit well to make the rancour of his malicious heart a rule wherebyto cry down the doctrine which he abhorred With a farre better grace might a Papist cry down our faith opposite to the doctrine of the Church of Rome by the Popes abhorring it and damning of it to the pit of hell For surely it is fit he should be of farre more authority then Jacobus Andreas not to speak of the Anathematization of it in the Councell of Trent nor of the common argument of Papists in that they deny that we can be saved many amongst us are of opinion that a Papist can be saved therefore better to be a Papist then a Protestant yet surely it is in the power of our corruption to requite malice with malice and as much to scorne with our heeles their Brotherhood as they ours But if through the grace of God we doe not give our selves leave to requite their malice if that be no scandall to themselves there is no cause why it should be any scandall unto us In Sir Edwin Sands about Fol. 59. there is such a relation as this Though the Princes and Heads of the weaker sides in those parts both of Palsgrave and Landsgrave have with great wisdome and judgement to aslack those flames imposed silence on that poynt to the Ministers of the one Party hoping that the charity and discretion of the other sort would have done the like yet it falleth out otherwise that Lutheran Preachers rage hitherto in their Pulpits Now let Arminians if they think good conclude herehence that seeing there was so little charity and discretion in the Lutheran Preachers it becomes them in their writings and Conclusions to shew as little charity and discretion as they for their hearts and that grace of God which they fashion to themselves will bear them out in this it beeing meerely the power of their own free-wills But this is not all I have to say in answer hereunto The phrase in Osiander is not errorum teterrimorum but haerescωn teterrimarum of which this Author saith they reckoned this for one And let him speak out and tell us what were the others Was not the denyall of Consubstantiation another As also the denyall of the lawfulnesse of that Baptisme which was administred by Woemen the practice whereof King James reformed in our Book of Common-Prayer As also their not concurrence with them in opinion about the Person of Christ which by their Ubiquitary Chimaera as Sir Edwin Sands call it they doe miserably deforme These and other such like were the errours whereof this Author saith Beza and his Fellowes were proved to be guilty of in this Conference for so I take his meaning pronouncing thereby sentence tanquam ex Cathedra Judicis or the Lutheran Party throughout in that Conference which Conference was not of Predestination alone but de Caenâ Domini de Personâ Christi de Imaginibus de Baptismo and last of all de Praedestinatione Yet I have not done with this For I beseech you consider whether this Author or his Oracle be not miserably deceived in all this and that these teterrimae Haereses are not such as Iacobus Andreas with his Lutheran party laid to the charge of Beza and his Brethren but rather such as Beza and his Brethren laid to the charge of the Lutherans and that not in this Conference but in their Writings in Scriptis so goeth the relation Whereas this Conference was not by writing but only by word of mouth Iacobus Andreas not enduring to give way to Beza's motion as touching the consigning of that which they delivered in writing under their hands For the relation in Osiander runs thus Ad haec D. Iacobus respondit Woortenbergicos Theologos Deum oraturos ut Bezae ipsius Collegis oculos mentis aperiat Ut autem illis dextram fraternitatis praebeant non ignor are illos quà m horribilium errorum teterrimarum haereseω◠in suis Scriptis coram Fcclesiâ ipsos reos egerint Ideoque se mirari quomodo eos pro fratribus agnoscere possint aut velint aut corum fraternitatem expetant si pro talibus agnoscant qui damnatas Haereses ab Orco revocent ut Ecclesiae Dei obtendant Now these words though at first sight they may seem to be referred either to the Woortenbergers as accusing Beza and his Brethren of such errours and heresies yet the words following
Parentemque caeterorum the Caeteri belike were such spirits as wee call Angells And that Maximi Dei leges were inevitabiles and this was called Necessity and such a Necessity cui ne Deos quidem that is inferior spirits resistere posse Quae verò ab Astris geruntur talia interdum esse ut evitari sapientiâ industriâ labore queant in quo sua est Fortuna Quae verò certis causis progrederentur ac permanerent fixa id dici Fatum quod tamen necessitatem non afferat electioni That the Manichees maintained two supreme and coëternall causes of all things we read the one the cause of Good the other of Evill and that every creature was a substantiall part of one or both and that man in his nature was compounded of both and that his corruption was essentiall from the supream Author of evill and not such as acrewed to him of disobedience We read But of their opinion that all things were determined by them both good and evill I no where read but in this Authors Legend Danaeus hath commented upon Austin de Haeresibus and to every Head of Heresy draws what he hath read thereof in other Authors But I find no mention at all of this Article amongst 21 shamefull errours of theirs which he reckons up The 19 th is this Voluntatem malè agendi quod vocant liberum arbitrium nob is à naturâ ipsâ insitam non rebellione nostrâ accersitam vel ex inobedientiâ natam Quanquam homines propriâ voluntate peccant And where Austin answereth the criminations against the Catholiques made by the Pelagians I find no mention at all of this He should have shewed from whom he takes this that understanding their Opinion aright we might the better judge of the reproachfull comparison which he makes 2 To the consideration of which comparison of his I now addresse my selfe He proposeth two things one whereof he saith must needs be maintained The First whereof is this That all actions naturall and Morall good and evill and all events likewise are absolutely necessary Concerning which I say First I have cause to doubt that this Author understands not aright the very notions of absolute necessity and necessity not absolute There is no greater necessity then necessity of nature And this necessity is twofold either in Essendo in being or in Operando in working God alone is necessary in being and his being is absolutely necessary it being impossible he should not be as not only we believe but Schoole Divines demonstrate and that with great variety of evident and curious conclusions As for the other necessity which is in respect of operation First this is no way incident unto God speaking of operation ad extrà and secluding the mysterious emanations within the Divine Nature such as are the Generation of the Sonne by the Father and the wonderfull Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne But ad extra this necessity of operation is only found in the creature and that only in such creatures as by necessity of nature are determined one way as fire to burne heavy things to move downwards and light things upwards the Sunne Moone and starres to give light and the heavens to turne round all naturall Agents in a word distinct from rationall are thus determined to wit to work that whereunto they are inclined by necessity of nature but yet so that being finite they are subject to superiour powers and thereby obnoxious to impediment most of them even to powers create all of them to power increate Whence it comes passe that no work of theirs is absolutely necessary especially in respect of God who can either set an end to all when he will or restraine their operations at his pleasure We know the Three Noble Children when they came forth of the fiery oven had not so much as any smell of the fire upon them And therefore Durand professeth that these things which are commonly accounted to come to passe most necessarily doe indeed come to passe meerely contingently in respect of the will of God Neverthelesse we willingly professe that upon supposition of the will of God that this or that shall come to passe it followeth necessarily that such a thing shall come to passe like as upon supposition that God knowes such a thing shall come to passe it followeth necessarily that such a thing shall come to passe but how not necessarily but either necessarily according as some things are brought to passe by naturall agents working necessarily after the manner aforesaid or contingently and freely according as some things are brought to passe by rationall agents working contingently and freely And therefore as touching the Question of the Schooles about the root of contingency Aquinas and Scotus concurre in resolving it into the Will of God but with this difference Scotus relates it into the will of God as a free agent Aquinas resolves it into the Will of God as an efficacious agent For the will of God is so efficacious that he can effectually procure both that things necessary shall be brought to passe necessarily and things contingent contingently and according he hath provided congruous causes hereof to wit both agents naturall for the produceing of necessary things necessarily and agents rationall for the producing of contingent things contingently and freely Thus God preordained that Josias should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar that Cyrus should proclaim liberty to the Jewes to returne into their Country yet what sober Divine hath made doubt whether Josias and Cyrus did not herein that which they did freely And as in doing so in abstaining from doing For God ordained that Christs bones should not be broken as also that when the Jewes all the Males came up to the Lord thrice in the year to Jerusalem None of their neighbours should desire their land Exod. 34. 24. Yet what sober man should make question whether the Souldiers did non as freely abstaine from breaking Christs bones as from ought else and so likewise the bordering Nations did as freely abstaine from invading the land of Israel And how often is this phrase used in Scripture Necesse est of some things coming to passe which yet came to passe as contingently and freely as ought else And unlesse this be granted that Gods determination is nothing prejudiciall to the freedome of the creatures will either we must deny faith and repentance to be the gifts of God or that they are works produced freely and so every action pleasing in the sight of God For the Scripture expressely professeth that God it is who worketh in us every thing that is pleasing in his sight And whatsoever God workes in us or bestows upon us in time the same he determined to work in us and to bestow upon us from everlasting For he worketh all things according to the counsell of his will Ephes 1. 11. and the counsell of his Will was everlasting it being the same with God
all causes meritorious If it be farther said that not so much the foresight of sin as to speak more properly sinne foreseen is the cause of reprobation I reply against it in this manner sinne foreseen doth suppose Gods decree to permit sinne and consequently if sinne foreseene be before reprobation then also the decree of permitting sinne is before the decree of reprobation that is the decree of damning for sinne But this cannot be as I endeavour to prove by two reasons The first is this There is no order in intentions but between the intention of the end and the intention of the means and the order is this that the intention of the end is before the intention of the means Therefore if the decree of permitting sinne be before the decree of damning for sinne the decree of permitting sinne must be the intention of the end and the decree of damning for sinne must be the intention of the meanes But this is notoriously untrue For it is apparent that damnation tends not to the permission of sinne as the end thereof for if it did then men were damned to this end that they might be permitted to sinne But far more likely it is that sinne should be permitted to this end that a man might be damned which yet by no means doe I a vouch other reasons I have to shew the vanity of this argumentation I rather professe that permssion of sinne and damnation are not subordinate as end means but coordinate both being means tending joyntly to a farther end which under correction from understandings purged from prejudice and false principles I take to be the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice vindicative 2. My second reason is if permission of sinne be first in intention and then damnation it followes that permission of sinne should be last in execution but this is most absurd namely that a man should be first damned and then suffered to sinne 2. My second principall argument is this Reprobation as it signifies Gods decree is the act of Gods will now the act of Gods will is the very will of God and the will of God is Gods essence and like as there can be no cause of Gods essence so there can be no cause of Gods will or of the act thereof Upon some such arguments as these Aquinas disputes that the predestination of Christ cannot be the cause of our Predestination adding that they are one act in God And when he comes to the resolution of the question he grants all as touching actum volentis that the one cannot be the cause of the other But only quoad praedestinationis terminum which is grace and glory or the things predestinated Christ is the cause of them but not of our predestination as touching the act of God predestinating And I think I may be bold to presume that Christs merits are of as great force to be the cause why God should elect man unto salvation as mans sinnes are of force to be the cause why God should reprobate him unto damnation The same Aquinas a tall fellow as touching Scolasticall argumentation hath professed that no man hath been so mad as to say that merits are the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis and why but because there can be no cause on mans part of the will of God quoad actum volentis Now reprobation is well knowne to be the will of God as well as election and therefore no cause can there be on mans part thereof quoad actum reprobantis And it is well knowne there is a predestination unto death as well as unto life and consequently t is as mad a thing in his judgement to maintaine that merits are the cause there of quoad actum praedestinantis God by efficacious grace could breake off any mans infidelity if it pleased him that is by affording him such a motion unto faith as he foresaw would be yeelded unto this is easily proved by the evident confession of Arminius formerly specified Now Why doth God so order it as to move some in such a manner as he foresees they will believe others in such a māner as he foresees they will not believe but because his purpose is to manifest the glory of his grace in the salvation of the one and the glory of his justice in the damnation of the other Herein I appeale to the judgement and conscience of every reasonable creature that understands it in spight of all prejudice and false principles to corrupt him 4. In saying sinne foreseen is the cause of Gods decree of damnation they presuppose a prescience of sinne as of a thing future without all ground For nothing can be foreknown as future unlesse it be future now these disputers presuppose a futurition of sinne and that from eternity without all ground For consider no sinne is future in its own nature for in its own nature it is meerely possible and indifferent as well not to be future as to become future and therefore it cannot passe out of the condition of a thing meerely possible into the condition of a thing future without a cause Now what cause doe these men devise of the futurition of sinne Extra Deum nothing can be the cause thereof For this passage of things out of the condition of things possible into the condition of things future was from everlasting for from everlasting they were future otherwise God could not have known them from everlasting And consequently the cause of this passage must be acknowledged to have been from everlasting and consequently nothing without God could be the cause of it seeing nothing without God was from everlasting Therefore the cause hereof must be found intra Deum within God then either the will of God which these men doe utterly disclaime or the knowledge of God but that is confessed to presuppose things future rather then to make them so or the essence of God now that may be considered either as working necessarily and if in that manner it were the cause of things future then all such things should become future by necessity of nature which to say is Atheisticall or as working freely and this is to grant that the will of God is the cause why every thing meerely possible in its own nature doth passe from everlasting into the condition of a thing future if so be it were future at all And indeed seeing no other cause can be pitched upon this free will of God must be acknowledged to be the cause of it And consequently the reason why every thing becomes future is because God hath determined it shall come to passe but with this difference All good things God hath determined shall come to passe by his effection All evill things God hath determined shall come to passe by his permission And the Scripture naturally affords plentifull testimony to confirme this without forcing it to interpretations congruous hereunto upon presumptuous grounds that these arguments proceed from
was sufficient to convert them which must be by the Antithesis to bring them to faith provided that they that is the hearers play the good husbands in the using of it But what is it to play the good husbands These and such like Phrasiologies are the usuall sculking courses of the Arminians like the inke which the Fish Saepia casts forth that she may thereby the better hide her selfe and escape from the hands of the Fisher But certainly it must be some worke or other to be performed by the hearer whereby he shall be brought to faith therefore I say it is either the worke of Faith it selfe or some other worke preceding it not of faith it selfe for faith it selfe cannot in reason be said to be a worke whereby a man is brought to faith Secondly herehence it followeth that Mans good husbandry being here distinguished from the worke of Faith it selfe the act of Faith is hereby made the work of mans will not of Gods grace if some work preceding faith whereupon faith is wrought by grace it followeth that the grace of faith is given according to mans works this is the foule issue of their tenet making faith either not at all the worke of God or if wrought by God to be wrought according to mans worke And thus they shape the grace of God conferring faith not only towards Reprobates but also towards the elect Now observe I beseech you how our Brittaine Divines doe purposely reject this Doctrine in the Synod of Dort art 3. in their third Thesis of those which are rejected by them The Thesis which they reject is positis omnibus gratiae operationibus quibus Deus ad efficiendam hanc conversionem utitur voluntatem hominis relinqui in aequilibrio velitne credere vel non credere convertete se ad Deum vel non convertere All the operations of grace supposed the will of man is left in an even ballance whether he will believe or no whether he will convert himselfe to God or no this is the very opinion of this Author against which our worthy Divines dispute there in this manner If this were so then it would follow that God by his grace is not the principall cause of mans believing and conversion but man by his free will rather For in this case God shall not predominantly worke mans conversion but upon condition only to wit in case the will first move it selfe whereby the lesse worke is given to God and the greater worke to man to wit in mans conversion 2. Herehence it will follow that God gives no more grace to the Elect than to the Reprobate and that the elect are not bound to be more thankefull to God than the non-elect because the worke of God in both is no other than to place the will in an even ballance 3. The grace of conversion is given with an intention that it shall prove effectuall and to move nay rather to bring man to the producing of the act of faith in such sort as it cannot be made in vaine Haec gratia a nullo duro corde respuitur ideo quippe tribuitur ut cordis duritia primitus auferatur And seeing the good Husbandry of mans consists in obedience to the Gospell it appears hereby that the grace they speake of is no other than the Gospell exhorting to repentance and this we confesse is sufficient in a certain kind to wit in the kind of instruction and exhortation and is not this sufficient to convict of unbeliefe as many as wilfully resist it and such is the condition of all in hearing the Gospell to whom God gives not the grace of conversion for as Saint Austin saith Libertas sine gratiâ non est libertas sed contumacia and no other impotency of beliefe doe we ascribe to a naturall man but such as consists in contumacy which is meerely a fault and corruption of the will not the defect of any naturall power and therefore as I said the impotemcy of converting to God by faith and repentance is impotency morall consisting meerely in the corruption of the will and there is no question but every man hath as much power to believe as Simon Magus of whom it is said that he believed Fides in voluntate est saith Austin credimus quando volumus but the will of man is so corrupt that without speciall preparation by Gods grace it is rather wilfully set to walke in the waies of flesh and bloud than obsequious to that which is good we make no question but that as Prosper saith every one that heareth the Gospell is thereby called unto grace even to obtaine pardon of sinne and salvation upon his faith in Christ and is called upon also to believe but withall we say with our Brittaine Divines Art 3. De Conversione Thesi 1a. In the explication thereof that God gives his elect not only posse credere si velint which in Austins opinion lib. 1. de gen contra Manic cap. 3. and de praedest Sanct. cap. 5. is common to all but velle credere nay they spare not to professe that if God should worke in us only posse credere posse convertere and leave the act of believing and converting to mans free will we should all doe as Adam did and fall from God through our free will and never bring this possibility into act take their own words Quod si vires quasdam infundendo daret Deus tantum posse credere posse convertere ipsum interim actum committeret libero hominum arbitrio certe quod primus parens fecit faceremus omnes libero arbitrio a Deo deficeremus nec possibilitatem hanc in actum perduceremus Haec itaque eximia est illa specialis gratia qua non modo possunt credere si velint sed volunt cum possunt Phil. 3. 13. Dat Deus nobis velle perficere As for that which he discourseth of Gods principall aime that the Church of Israell should bring forth good fruit let us speake plainly and not cheat our selves first and then become impostors unto others was it that which God did principally intend Gods intentions are his decrees now if God did decree they should bring forth fruit de facto who hath resisted his will Nay take their own rules according to their doctrine of Scientia media Why did God give them only such a grace to move them unto fruitfulnes which he foresaw they would resist And refuse to give such grace as he foresaw would not be resisted and that without all prejudice to their wills Let thē answer unto this for that God in the storehouse of his wisdome hath such courses as being used he foreseeth infalliby that any sin will be hindred Arminius acknowledgeth as I have oftē alleadged him But we may safely say 1. That God intended it should be their duty to bring forth fruit 2. If he did farther intend that the Church of Israel should de facto bring forth fruit this he
did bring to passe also but withall let us consider what the Apostle teacheth us and take that along with us also namely that all are not Israel that are of Israel and so in his elect he effecteth this 3. I doubt not but this is pronounced chiefely for the elects sake and though they are not as yet so fruitfull as they should be yet I nothing doubt but this passionate expostulation was a means to turne them to the Lord that is some of them For God calls them not all at once but some at one houre of the day some at another 4. It might be a means to bring others also though not to true conversion yet ad exteriorem vitae emendationem As for that of our Saviour over Jerusalem Math. 23. 37. That is of another condition in two respects Jerusalem neither saw his teares nor heard his bemoaning of it but we heare of it and read it in his word and it is equally effectuall with the elect of God and others also as the expostulation we read Isai 5. Secondly our Saviour was a man as well as God and though the Sonne of God yet made under the Law and accordingly as much bound to desire and endeavour the salvation of all amongst whom he was sent as any Prophet or Apostle or Minister of Gods word That in the 5. Ioh. 34. These things have I spoken unto you that ye might be saved What is the meaning thereof but this These things have I spoken unto you exhorting you to believe that ye might be saved according to that v. 24. He that heareth me and believeth him that sent me hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation but hath passed from death to life and by the words following in the words alleadged by him it appears that there is no other intention of salvation meant than in case they believe But ye will not come unto me that ye might have life v. 40. And as before I said Christ being made under the Law was bound as well as we are to desire the salvation of his Brethren that is to desire and labour the conversion of those to whom he was sent that so they might be saved DISCOURSE SECT IV. THis is also the use and end for which the Sacraments were ordained as we may see Luk. 7. 30. Where we have these wordes But the Scribes and Pharisees and expounders of the Law despised the councell of God against them selves and were not Baptized of Iohn In which words thus much is plainly included that it was Gods counsell and purpose in Iohns Baptisme to bring them to Christ and in him to Heaven much more is it in the end of Christs Baptisme which is more excellent than Iohns was not in substance but in the fulnesse of grace administred and dispensed by it All that have been Baptized into Christ sayth the Apostle have been Baptized unto his death Rom. 6. 3. And Gal. 3. 29. All ye that are Baptized into Christ have put on Christ the very phrases there used shew that Baptisme is in its originall intention an instrument of uniting men to Christ and giving them communion with him in the benefits of his death except a man be borne of water saith Christ and of the spirit he cannot c. Ioh. 3. 5. In which words are delivered two things 1. The necessity of regeneration except a man be born again 2. The working causes of it efficient the Spirit of God instrumentall the Sacrament of Baptisme there called water from the outward matter of it Baptisme therefore is appointed to be a means of regeneration to all those that are Baptized and doth effect it in all that doe not put an obstacle in the way to hinder it For this cause doth the Apostell dignifye it the layer of regeneration Titus 3. 5. I will shut up this with Acts. 2. 38. Where Peter sayth repent and be Baptized every one of you for the remission of sinnes plainly implying that therefore is Baptisme ordained to be received that those who doe receive it might have their sinnes remitted The patience of God also which is another singular donation and gift of God to men is exercised to this very end as appeares Rom. 2. 4. Despisest thou the riches of his goodnesse and forbearance and long suffering not knowing that the goodnesse of God leadeth thee to repentance But thou after thy hardnesse of heart that canst not repent heapest up c. In these words we may note for our purpose 1. Gods end and intent in forbearing sinners and that is the leading of them to repentance and so to Salvation for repentance is Per se ordinata ad salutem as a means to the end 2. The persons to whom God intends this good by his forbearance and they are such as dispise the riches of his goodnesse and have hard and impenitent hearts 3. The issue and event of this theire contempt of Gods patience and that is a treasuring up wrath unto themselves against the day of wrath Out of all which laid togeher ariseth thus much That God by sparing wicked men who have hard and impenitent hearts intends their everlasting good though they by the abuse of his patience and refusall to repent doe treasure up to themselues wrath and eternall misery The like to this is delivered in the 2 Peter 3. 9. God is not slack as some men count slacknesse but patient toward us that is us men And why patient towards us Because he would have none to perish The end therefore of Gods patience is mans repentance and Salvation TWISSE Consideration THough this Author doth little answer your expectation in confining himselfe to Reprobation therein to give you satisfaction as touching the reason why he hath changed his mind in certain controversies yet it may be his purpose is to make you amends by acquainting you with some misteries of his concerning Baptisme out of Luk. 7. 30. Where it is said of the Scribes and Pharises that in refusing to be Baptized of Iohn they despised the counsell of God against themselves hence he inferres that it was Gods counsell and purpose in Iohns Baptisme to bring them to Christ and in him to heaven as much as to say God purposed to bring them to Christ and to heaven but they would not and so it came to passe that Omnipotentis Dei voluntatis effectus was hindered by the will of the creature which Austin accounted a very foule absurdity as if God were not able to bring them to Christ yet our Saviour professeth that like as none can come unto him except the Father draw him so on the other side every one that the Father giveth me comes unto me Ioh. 6. And the Apostle saith Who hath resisted his will Omnipotente facilitate convertit saith Austin ex nolentibus volentes facit But as for the Text suppose the Evangelist had called it the purpose of God yet the object of his purpose is not
It may be thou maist have experience of the same power of divine grace to bring thee to faith also and to repentance therefore seeing Gods Word is the only meanes to worke faith waite daily at his Gates and give attendance at the posts of his doores and doe not prescribe unto him or say with Joram Shall I wait upon the Lord any longer though it be longere he calls thee yet it may goe never a whit the worse with thee for that for sometimes it falleth out that the last are first and the first last and the commendation that Austin makes of the Theef's faith upon the Crosse is remarkeable De orig animae lib. 1. cap. 9. Tanto pondere appensum est tantumque valuit ap ud eum qui haec novit appendere quod confessus est dominum crucifixum quantum si fuisset pro Domino crucifixus Tunc enim fides ejus de ligno floruit quando discipulorum marcuit nisi cujus mortis terrore marcuerunt ejus resurrectione reviresceret Illi enim desperaverunt de moriente ille speravit in commorientem Refugerunt illi authorem vitae rogavit ille consortem poenae Doluerunt illi tanquam homines mortem credidit ille regnaturum esse post mortem Deseruerunt illi sponsorem salutis honoravit ille socium crucis Inventa est in eo mensura Martyris qui tunc in Christum credidit quando defecerunt qui futuri erant Martyres 2. From the Comedy I come to the Tragedy I meane the story of Spira Sleidan saith of him that Incredibili ardore caepit complecti puriorem doctrinam cum indies magis magisque proficeret non domi tantum apud amicos quid sentiret de singulis dogmatis verum etiam passim apud omnes explicabat Tidings hereof coming to the Popes Legat then at Venice John Casa Arch-Bishop of Beneventum he convents Spira who confesseth his errour before him intreats pardon and promiseth obedience for time to come The Legat not contented with this commands him to goe home and publiquely to revoke his errour Sleidan writes no more here of but this Accipit ille conditionem licet etiam tum inciperet ipsum paenitere facti tamen urgentibus amicis qui non ipsius modo sed conjugis etiam liberorum facultatum ipsius spem totam in eo positam dicerent obtemperavit Osiander writes that pessimo consilio obsecutus abnegando veritatem caelestem perrexit eamque publice ut haeresin blasphemavit abjuravit The distresse of conscience which overtooke him hereupon is notorious the issue whereof was to end his woefull dayes more woefully in despaire But nothing more strange then his discourses and meditations in the midst of this his desperate condition As for the particulars following 1 Touching the greatnesse of his sinne and that he was taken off from that by the example of Peter I find no such thing neither in Sleidan nor Osiander nor in Goulartius but rather in this latter who makes the largest relation thereof taken out of the discourse of one Henry Scringer a learned Lawyer who was then at Padua who did see and many times talke with this poore Spira I find that which makes to the contrary namely that the sinne which he laid to his owne charge was the sinne against the Holy Ghost And no example I trust neither of Peter nor any other was sufficient to take him off from despaire in such a case 2. And as for the discourse here suggested of his absolute reprobation which he opposed against their comforts ministred unto him no mention thereof neither in Sleidan nor in Osiander nay Osiander writes that he was wish'd to revoke doctrinam Lutheranam and this was it which he did as he sayeth blaspheme as an heresy and abjure Goulartius indeed relates how he conceived himselfe to be reprobated of God as justly he might in case he judged himselfe to have sinned against the Holy Ghost And as for that which is here set down in Latin of him that is a Reprobate namely that necessario condemnabitur though his sins be small few that nihil interest multa an pauca magna an parva sint quando nec Dei misericordia nec Christi sanguis quicquam ad eos pertinet Neither Sleidan nor Osiander nor Goulartius makes any mention of it And therefore I wonder not that he neither followeth Sleidan nor Osiander much lesse that he followes not Goulartius He cites Caelius secundus and Calvin as his Authours and some others that wrot thereof to their friends but names them not as neither where it is that Caelius secundus makes mention of it or in what booke of Calvin it is found I imagined it might be in his Epistles I have spent some houres in searching therein from the yeare 1545 to the yeare 1663 and can find nothing concerning it Now Goulartius wrote since Caelius secundus and Calvin and Sleidan and his relation is large and it semes he inquired in to it somewhat better then they that went before him And thus he relates it out of the discourse of Henry Scringer a Lawyer of Padua who saw Spira at that time and divers times spake with him In a small towne of the territory of Padua called Civitelle there was a Learned Lawyer and advocat a wise and very rich man and an honourable father of a family called Francis Spira who having sayd and done divers things against his conscience to maintaine himselfe and his charge observe by the way he delivers the cause only in generall concealing the speciality it being so strang a testimony and evidence against the Romish Religion being returned to his house he could never rest an houre not a minut nor have any ease of his continuall anguish And even from that night he was so terrified and had such horrour of his actions as he held himselfe for lost For as he himselfe did afterward confesse he did set plainely before his eyes all the torments all the paines of the damned and in his soule did heare the fearfull sentences being drawne before the judgment seat of Jesus Christ a fearfull example to all Apostates The next day and so following he was not seene to resume any courage but his spirits were strangely troubled and the terrour tooke from him all rest and appetite This accident was so greivous to his friends as some repented them much that they had beene the cause of so great an inconvenience by their intreaties Others thinking it did proceed from some cholerick or melancholy humour were of opinion to send him to Padova to be Physicked by the Learned Physitians revived by honorable company and setled by the coference of Learned men there to some of which he was well knowne His Wife and Children with some of his familiar friends did accompany him and he was lodged in one of the chiefe houses Frisimilega Bellocat and Crassus famous Physitians did visit him and give him Physicke with singular
perdition whereof Jesus Christ propounds an example in the rich man Luc. 16. That God doth often propound to mankind an hope of reward to draw them to the right beliefe of his holy will and oft-times withdrawes them from impieties by fearfull and prodigious signes And yet as impiety is naturall to men they make not their profit of such instructions and think not that it concernes them but impute it to any other thing rather then to the wisdome of God to feare and reverence him Hereupon he made a bitter invective against a certain Philosopher whom he had known above twenty years before for that his Morosoph had been so impudent to deliver in his lessons yea to write it and publish it in Print that all the Miracles that Christ had done upon the earth might well be done by a man that were skilfull in the knowledge of naturall things It were hard to represent the admiration wherewith they were surprized and with what compassion they were moved that came to visit him for the discourses which they heard come from his mouth Every man laboured to reduce this poore man to some hope of his salvation Among others there was one a Reverend man for his holinesse of life who departed not from the Patients bed it was the Bishop of Capod ' Istria in the Venetians Territory This was Vergerius who afterwards renounced Popery and became a Protestant He ceased not to exhort Spira and ceased not by many testimonies of the holy Scriptures to divert him from that apprehension Adding that he did not think his spirit was altogether voyd and destitute of some good and heavenly inspirations seeing he spake so holily and devoutly of the excellency of Christian Religion 4. Although the sick man knew ful well that these admonitions proceeded from a sincere and true heart yet for that he had diverse times rejected them he began to frowne saying to the Bishop you believe as I think that I doe willingly nourish this obstinacy in my mind and that I take delight in this vehement passion of despaire If you be of that opinion you are deceived I will tell you to the end you may know my resolution that if I could be perswaded that the judgement of God might by any meanes be changed or mitigated for mee it should not grieve me to be tormented ten thousand yeares with the sharpest paines of hell so as I might have any hope of rest after this long sufferance But even in that whereby you doe exhort me to gather any hope I see all meanes of health and pardon taken from me For if the testimonies of holy Scripture have any authority as they have doe you thinke that Jesus Christ hath said in vaine that he which hath renounced him before men he will renounce him before his heavenly father Doe you not see that it concernes me and that it is as it were particularly verified in my person What shall become of him whom the Sonne hath disavowed before his Father when as you say we must hope for no salvation but in Jesus Christ Thereupon he did expound certain passages of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and of the second Catholique Epistle of Saint Peter out of which he drew terrible conclusions against himselfe Wee cannot believe with what gravity and vehemency his words were delivered neither was there ever heard man pleading better for himselfe then Spira did then against himselfe He did alleadge notable things of Gods justice detesting his forepassed life admonishing all that were about him very earnestly not to think that Christian life was a light thing and easily discharged That it doth not consist only in having the head Baptised in reading certaine verses and texts of the Gospell and to be termed an honest man but it was needfull to live as the word of truth doth command him Thereupon he repeated a Text out of Saint Peter exhorting us to shew through holinesse of life certain signes of the love of God towards us and of the confidence we should have in him He said moreover that he had known many who after they had tasted the sweetnesse of true felicity suffered themselves so to be carried away as they had no longer care to performe that which belonged to a child of God 5. He protested that he had sometimes imagined that his sinnes had been hidden and that he could not be punished for that Christ had made satisfaction for them but then he knew too late that those things belonged only to the elect and chosen of God betwixt whose sinnes and the celestiall Throne Jesus Christ sets his precious bloud and the dignity of his obedience as a veile and shadow to cover them and doth plant them against the Divine vengeance as an high and strong Rampart that sinners repenting them might not be opprest nor drowned with the deluge and overflowings of their offences and sinnes As for himselfe seeing that he had renounced our Saviour Jesus Christ here was the true burthen of his sorrowfull heart he had as one should say overthrowne this strong Rampart with his own hands so that after this ruine and overflowing the deluge of waters of this vengeance had covered and swallowed up his soule One of his most familiar friends said unto him that he did hold the cause of this his great torment proceeded from abundance of Melancholy humours that did so trouble his braine Spira remembring that he had many times refuted that opinion and seeing they were to begin againe said unto the other You may think what you please but God in truth hath troubled my spirit and deprived me of judgement seeing it is impossible for me to have any hope of my salvation Having continued in such and the like speeches during his abode at Padua they carried him back to his own house at Civitelle where he dyed in this despaire DISCOURSE SECT III. It makes Ministers unable to afford true comfort to the tempted and this it doth because it 1. Takes from them all solid grounds of comfort 2. Leaves them only weake and insufficient grounds 1. It bereaves them of the solid grounds of comfort which are these 1. The universality of Gods love 2. Of Christs death 3. And of the covenant of grace That Minister which doth explaine and apply these three things soundly and wisely to him that is tempted in this kind doth that which is abundantly enough for the relieving and releasing of him from his temptation and he that doth not apply these leaves him as he found him in the midst of his temptation still whatsoever may be said to the contrary in the hear of disputation Etsi multa disputantur durius saith Melancthon tamen necesse est in vero agone ad hanc arcem confugere videlicet quod de voluntate Dei indicandum sit ex verbo expresso quod promissio sit universalis quod sit mandatum Dei aeternum immutabile audire filium assentiri promissioni Though there
issues doe justly befall them because they abhorre to professe that God causeth us to walke in his statutes and to keepe his judgements and doe them The course that Junius took to quiet her conscience who thought she was damned for neglecting to goe to Masse by proving unto her that the Masse was a meere wil-worship was faire and reasonable but the course this Author takes to comfort an afflicted soule I have shewed to be most unreasonable Absolute reprobate hath a different sense according as it is differently applyed If applyed unto damnation or the denyall of glory we utterly deny that either the one is inflicted or glory is denyed absolutely but meerely upon supposition of sinne But applyed to grace we willingly confesse that God doth absolutely give the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance to whom he will according to that of Saint Paul He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. compared with Rom. 11. 30. Where to shew mercy is apparently to bring men unto faith neither can it have any other sense Rom. 9. 18. being set in opposition to hardening and in reference to the objection rising therehence in the words following Thou wilt say then why doth he yet complaine for who hath resisted his will v. 19. And while this Author denies that faith and repentance are given according to the good pleasure of Gods will which is to give them absolutely he must be driven to confesse that they are given conditionally and if a man will take any comfort therehence he must be acquainted with the condition which yet this Author undertaking the office of consolation upon this ground doth from the first to the last conceale as if he feared to discover the shamefull nakednesse of his cause which I have adventured to display and whereof I desire the indifferent reader would judge So that indeed this discourse is a new snare rather to entangle a poore soule in sadnesse and heavinesse inextricable fowler-like then any true office of consolation where she may escape as a bird out of the first snare of the Fowler by breaking it and delivering her Indeed these grounds of hope and comfort a Minister cannot make use of that holds absolute Reprobation What sober man would expect he should but such a one is never a whit the worse comforter for that For as for these grounds I have already discovered them to be voyd of all truth of all sobriety For if men be not absolutely Reprobated from the grace of faith and of repentance but conditionally For as for the denying of glory or inflicting damnation we utterly deny that God hath decreed that they shall have their course absolutely according to the meere pleasure of his will having made a Law according whereunto he purposeth to proceed therein it became this Author performing the part of a Comforter on this ground to make knowne the condition which he utterly declineth And with all I have shewed the reasons of his carriage thus in Hugger Mugger to wit that their shamefull Tenets might not breake forth and be brought to light We abhorre to say that God gives the grace of faith and repentance according to mens workes Wee abhorre to say that God workes in men the act of believing and repenting provided they will believe and repent or that he workes in them the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle of every good worke modovelint But our comsolations proceed as I have shewed in this manner If any man man doth believe and repent we can assure such a one by our doctrine that he is an elect of God this Arminians by their doctrine cannot as who maintaine that a true believer may fall a way from grace and be damned which is to hold the soules of the best children of God upon the rack of feares and terrours and tortures continually and make them walke as it were upon pinacles of the Temple for they have no assurance of stedfastnesse but in their owne wills to keepe them from dropping into Hell fire which burneth under them If men doe not believe and repent we will enquire into the cause of their feares grounds of their apprehentions that they are Reprobates and shew that they have no just cause for such apprehensions whether it be the conscience of their sinne or want of faith that doth affright them For as much as the holiest meÌ„ living before their calling had as great cause to be affrighted as they yet had they thereupon conceived themselves to be Reprobates this had been but an erronious conceit If perhaps it be not the conscience of sinne in generall that affrights them but rather the conscience of some sinne in speciall which they conceive to be a sinne unto death or a sinne against the Holy Ghost which they conceive to be unpardonable we will conferre with them thereabouts and try whether they understand aright the nature of that sinne and endeavour to scatter those mists of illusions in this particular which Satan hath raised desiring to swallow them up in desperation if it doe not prove to be a sinne against the Holy Ghost we will set them in a course to get the spirit of faith and of repentance For albeit God alone can give them yet seeing his Word is a Word of power even a voyce that pearceth the graves we willperswade them to give themselves to be wrought upon by Gods Word and we will pray for them who yet want spirit to pray for themselves And albeit they cannot prepare themselves in a gratious manner to the hearing of Gods Word yet let them come and when they are come let his Word worke yet if forthwith we have not that comfortable experience of Gods goodnesse towards us let us not give over to wait at the lords gates and to give attendance at the posts of his doore Give him leave to be the Master of his own times let us not prescribe unto him We know his course is to call some at one houre of the day some at an other and at the very last hour he calleth some This is the way of consolation that we take We doe not take any such course as this Author at his pleasure obtrudes upon us that God would have all to be saved and that Christ died for all I have allready set forth this Authors collusions in his triple universality of Gods love Christs death and and of the Covenant of grace We rather will exhort him to believe and herein we will take such course as God in his Word hath directed us unto and we will pray unto God that his Word may be as the raine that cometh downe and the snow from Heaven returneth not thither but watereth the earth and maketh it bring forth buâ—d hat it may give seed to the sower and bread to him that eateth So his Word may be that goeth out of his mouth it may not returne unto him voyd but accomplish that
the light but the morning is even to them as the shadow of death if one know them they are in the terrours of the shadow of death Now there is a course of adulterating the word of God and deflouring his truth every way as abominable in the sight of God as the deflowring of women yea and much more abominable In my answer to the former discourse as I remember I proposed certaine arguments to prove the absolute nature of Reprobation This Authour doth not accommodate himselfe nor his Achates neither to answer so much as one of them Thus having Prefaced concerning these concealed Authours and therewithall made answer to the Preface of this Interpolator I come to make answer to the Additions themselves The Answer to the Additions 1. Some say that God of his meer pleasure antecedent to all sinne in the Creature originall or actnall did decree to glorifie his Soveraigntie and Justice in the eternall rejection and damnation of the greatest part of Mankind as the end and in their unavoidable sinne and impenitence as the meanes 2. The rest of that side thinking to avoid the great inconveniences to which the supralapsarian way lies open fall downe a little lower and present men to God in his decree of Reprobation lying in the fall under the guilt of originall sinne laying 3 That God looking upon miserable mankind lying in Adam's sinne did decree the greatest number of men even those men whom he calls to repentance and salvation by the preaching of the Gospel to Hell torments for ever and without all remedie for the declaration of his severe justice This way went the Synod Let the Reader observe that this Authour in stating the opinion of our Divines alleageth no passages out of any of them no nor so much as quotes the place of any of their writings where this doctrine is to be found in the terme wherein he delivers it that so he may take the greater libertie to shape their opinions according to his owne pleasure first as touching the first observe 1. How he shapes this opinion 2 the Persons to whom he imputes it concerning the first the Decree is shaped as consisting of two parts The one sets downe the end which God intended the other the meanes whereby this end is procured 1. As touching the end it is hard to say by his shaping of it whether the manifestation of God's glory be made the end or man's damnation and if any one conceaves hereupon that man's Damnation is the end which God intended in the opinion of our Divines like enough this Authour will be well enough pleased with it 2. Consider how God's Soveraingtie and Justice are coupled together as appearing in the eternall rejection and damnation of his Creatures as if both of them did appeare equally in each 3. Then rejection is proposed without distinction and specification that we might know whether he understands it of rejection from Grace or rejection from Glorie 4. And in the fourth place he couples rejection with Damnation as if both were of equall yoke signifying Acts temporall whereas rejection in the Common notion thereof is all one with reprobation and reprobation is commonly taken for an act eternall to witt The eternall purpose of God to deny grace permit sinne and inflict damnation for sinne 5. Damnation is here brought in as belonging to the Decree of the end and quite left out in the Decree of the meanes whereas by the very light of Nature it is apparent that Justice vindicative is manifested no where more then in the execution of punishment 6. And lastly Damnation in it selfe is no manifestation of Justice any more then of Injustice unlesse it be executed as a condigne punishment for sinne yet most absurdly he talks of manifesting justice in man's Damnation without specifying the meritorious cause of Damnation without consideration whereof Damnation is no manifestation of Justice either Divine or humane 7. Whereas he sets forth the Persons damned to be the greatest part of Man-kind this is only to speak with a full mouth and to gull a partiall Reader who may be well pleased to have his mouth filled with an emptie spoone For the Scripture teatheth expreslie that even of them that are called but few are chosen and clear reason doth manifest that look how God may deale with one in the same manner it is lawfull for him to deale with Millions We love to speak distinctly and accordingly we say that all God's decrees are of doing something for the manifestation of his owne Glory I say of doing something for no glory of God is manifested in Decreeing but in executing his Decrees As when Solomon saith God hath made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill Prov 16 4. So then the manifestation of God's Glory is the end of all his actions And accordingly if rejection here be taken for God's Decree no glory is manifested herein and too absurd it is to account God's eternall Decrees to to be meanes for the accomplishing of his ends But if Rejection be taken here for a temporall Act to witt Of finall dereliction in sinne then it may be a meanes for the manifestation of God's glory in a certaine kind namely his Soveraigntie for like as God hath mercy on whom he will in not leaving them finally in their sinnes but delivering them from the power of it by bestowing on them the Grace of Faith and Repentance In like manner God hardneth whom he will in denying the same Grace of Faith and Repentance and so finally leaving them and permitting them to continue finally in their sinnes without breaking them of by repentance So that God proceed's herein merely according to his pleasure for the manifestation of that Soveraingtie which he hath as a Creator over his Creatures Even the same that the Potter hath over his Clay to make of the same lump one vessell unto honour an other unto dishonour No Justice is manifested in this difference I meane no such Justice as proceedes in reference to the workes of men for he doth not bestow Grace upon men because of their good workes nor deny grace unto them because of their evill workes but finding men equall in the state of sinne he bestowes Grace upon the one to cure sinne in them and bestowes it not upon others Yet God is just herein in another respect namely in as much as he doth no other thing in all this but such as he hath a lawfull power to doe As for Damnation that is clearly an Act temporall and this the Lord inflicts on none but for their sinnes And like as in giving or denying grace God manifested no justice Compensative but Soveraigntie only proceeding therein merely according unto pleasure So in inflicting dānation denying glory he manifest's vindicative Justice alone not proceeding according to mere pleasure herein but according to mens workes and that according to a Law which himselfe hath given unto men namely
of them that are called but few are chosen Yet might that Synod well admonish Maccovius to take heed of such words as might give offence to tender yeares and be carefull to expresse the same truth in as inoffensive way as we can And accordingly having a digression in this very Argument in my Vindiciae Gratiae I proposed it in this manner Whether the holy one of Israell without any injurie to his Holy Majestie may be said to will sinne after a certaine manner and I maintaine the affirmative after this manner Deus vult ut peccatum fiat ipso permittente God will have sinne to come to passe by his permission and Bellarmine confesseth that Malum esse Deo permittente bonum est It is good that evill should be by God's permission which was also the saying of Austine long before And that non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe except God Omnipotent will have it come to passe either by suffering it or himselfe working it And the eleventh Article of the Church of Ireland framed in the dayes of King J'ames runnes thus God from all eternitie did by his unchangable Counsell ordaine what soever in time should come to passe yet so as there by no violence is offered to the to the wills of the reasonable Creatures and neither the libertie nor the contingency of second causes is taken away but established rather And Arminius himselfe professeth that Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerums uorum implere God would have Achab to fill up the measure of his sinnes and what is it to fill up the measure of his sinnes but to adde sinne unto sinne And this he delivereth without all qualification By these instances it appeareth That they of the first side can easily beare one with another in this difference And to say the truth there is no reason why they should quarrell about circumstances seeing they agree in the substance for which they both contend 1 That the moving cause of Reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall 2. That the finall impenitencie and Damnation of Reprobates are necessary and unavoidable by God's absolute Decree The difference which this Authour takes into Consideration is about the object of Predestination and the difference in opinion thereabouts is usually to be observed threefold though this Authour is pleased to take notice of a secondfold difference for some conceive the object of Predestination to be man-kind as yet not created others conceive the object thereof to be man-kind created but not yet corrupted A third sort maintaine the object thereof to be man-kind both created and corrupted Now D. Iunius hath endeavoured to reconcile the three opinions making place for each consideration in the object of predestination And Piscator after him adventured on the like reconciliation and hath performed it with more perspicuitie and with better successe in my judgment then Iunius And that according to three different acts concurring unto Predestination The first is saith he God's purpose to create man-kind in Adam unto different ends now this Act doth clearely require the object thereof to be man-kind not yet Created The second Act he conceives to be God's Decree to permit all men to fall in Adam Now this Act he conceives as clearly to suppose the object thereof to be man-kind created but not corrupted The third last Act he conceives to be God's decree to choose some to shew compassion on them in raising them out of sinne by saith and repentance and of Reprobating others leaving them as be findes them and permitting them to finish their dayes in sinne to the end he might manifest the glorie of his grace in saving the one the glorie of his Justice in damning others Now this third Act he supposeth manifestly to require the object thereof to be man-kind both created and corrupted Now the Authours of these severall opinions have no reason to go together by the eares about these three opinions but with Brotherly love to entertaine one another First because the difference herein is not so much in Divinitie as in Logick and Philosophie difference in opinion about order in intentions being meerly Logicall and to be composed according to the right stating of the end intended and of the meanes conducing to the end it being generally confessed that the intention of the end is before the intention of meanes conducing thereunto And that look what is first in intention the same must be last in execution Secondly the Authours of these severall opinions about the object of Predestination doe all agree in two principall points 1. That all men before God's eternall predestination and reprobation are considered as equall in themselves whether as uncreated or as created but not corrupted or lastly whether created or corrupted 2 That God's grace only makes the difference choosing some to worke thē to faith repentance perseverance therein while he rejecteth others leaving thē as he findes them permitting them to finish their dayes in sinne whereby is upheld and maintained 1. First the prerogative of God's grace as only effectuall to the working of men unto that which is good 2. And secondly the prerogative of God's Soveraigntie in shewing mercy on whome he will to bring them to Faith and true repentance and hardning others that is not bestowing of grace and repentance upon them And seeing they all agree in these momentous points of Divinitie they have no cause to take it offensively at the hands of one another that they differ in a point of Logick Now I have adventured on this argument to find out to my selfe and give unto others some better satisfaction then formerly hath been exhibited and that by distinguishing Two decrees only on each part to witt the decree of the end and the decree of the meanes As for example 1. On the part of Predestination and Election I conceive the end to be the manifestation of God's glorious grace in the way of mercie mixt with Justice on a certaine number of men And the Decree of the meanes is to create them and permit them all to fall in Adam and to bring them forth into the world in their severall generations clothed with originall sinne and to send Christ into the world to dye for them and for Christ's sake first to bestow the grace of faith and repentance upon them and finally to save them 2. On the part of Reprobation I conceive the end to be the manifestation of God's glory in the way of Justice vindicative And the decree of meanes to be partly common and partly proper the common meanes are to create them and permit them all to fall in Adam and bring them forth into the world clothed with originall sin the speciall meanes are to leave them as he finds them and permit them to finish their daies in sinne and so not
Agents by whom they are acted to doe otherwise Yet there is another difference according to the morall condition of these actions For if they are good and so farre as they are goood they come to passe by Gods working of them but if they are evill and so farre as they are evill they come to passe onely by Gods permitting according to that of Austin Non aliquid sit nisi omnipotēs fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo Not any thing comes to passe but God willing it either by suffering it to wit in case it be evill or himselfe working it to wit in case it be good And according to that eleventh Article of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-Bishop and Bishops and the rest of the Clergy in Ireland which is this God from all eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever should come to passe in time yet so as thereby no violence is offered to the wills of the reasonable creatures and neither the liberty nor the contingency of the second causes is taken away but established rather Farther consider it is confessed by all that God concurres in producing the act of sinne as an efficient cause thereof not morall but naturall And Aquinas himselfe though he denyes that Voluntas Dei est malorum Because indeed as Hugo de Sancto Victore observes by the will of God is commonly understood in this case Voluntas approbans his will approving it and loving it And so it is justly denyed that God doth will evill things speaking of the evill of sinne Yet Aquinas professeth and disputes and proves that Actus peccati est a Deo the Act of sinne is from God Like as the Act of walking is from the soule though the lamenes in walking ariseth from some disease in the legge Now the Devill concurres not in this manner to any act of sin neither is the efficient cause thereof in the Kinde of a Naturall efficient but onely Morall by tempting and perswading What therefore shall we conclude as this Authour doth without feare or witt or honesty that by the confession of all men God is hereby made worse then the Devill To what abominable courses do the wilde witts and profane hearts of these men expose them The greatest works of Satan in moving men to sin are comprehended under blinding and hardening of them Now these operations are also attributed to God And like enough he doth usually performe them not by the ministry of his holy Angells but by the Ministry of Satan and his Angells of Darkenesse as we read 1. Kings 22. v. 21. 22. 23. Ioh 13. 27. Acts 5. 3. What then shall the Devill so farre possesse our hearts as to break forth into such intolerable blasphemyes as to conclude hereupon that God is bad or worse then the Devill The providence of God I willingly confesse is wonderfull and mysterious in this like unto the Nature of God to be adored rather then pryed into So this providence to be dreaded rather then for satisfaction to every wanton and wild witt to be searched into Yet all confesse that the Lord could hinder all this if it pleased him and rebuke Satan and restraine the power and stop the course of sin and prevent occasions leading thereunto but he will not and why But because he knowes it becomes his allmighty power and wisdome infinite rather exmalis bene facere quà m malum esse non sinere To worke good out of evill then not at all to suffer evill Lastly what meanes this Authour to carry himselfe so as to betray so strange ignorance in mitigating Satans operation in tempting unto sin as if this were not sufficient to make him the Authour of sin Especially considering the reason that moves him hereunto which is meerely the delight that he takes in dishonouring God and being a desperate spirit himselfe to make as many as he can partakers of the same desperate condition For cupiunt perditi perdere sayth Cyprian cum sint ipsi paenales quaerunt sibi ad poenam comites being damned themselves they desire to damne as many as they can And being bound in chaines and kept to the judgement of the great day they desire to have as many companions as they can in drinking of that cup of trembling and sucking the very dreggs of that cup of trembling and wringing them out For as the Historian observes Maligna est calamitas cum suo supplicio crucietur acquiescit alieno Calamity makes a man of a spightfull nature and when himselfe is tormented he takes content in this that others suffer with him And as the Oratour observes Nullum adversarium magis metuas quà m qui non potest vivere potest occidere No adversary more to be feared then he who cannot live himselfe yet can kill another This makes a coward resolute when he must needs dye he will fight like a mad man and kill all he can I say what meanes this Authour to carry the matter hand over head as if it were without question That he is not the Authour of sinne who onely is a Morall cause thereof but rather he that is the naturall efficient whereas great Divines carry it to the contrary As namely Dominicus Soto in his first booke of nature and grace chap 18. Although sayth he there are many that thinke it hard to explicate how in the hatred of God which hath an inward and indivisible malignity God can be the cause of the entity but not of the fault Yet this is not so hard to be understood Then he proceeds to shew how this may be First laying for his ground what it is to be the cause of sinne thus In morall actions he is altogether and is judged to be the cause who by a law or help or counsell or favour or perswasion moves any one either to good or evill Observe I pray the doctrine of this School-Divine directly contrary to that which this Authour supposeth without all proofe For in the judgement of Dominicus Soto he onely is to be accounted the cause of another mans sinne who is the morall cause thereof as by tempting counselling perswading thereunto And upon this ground he proceeds to free God from being the Authour of it after this manner But as for God he by all these wayes moves his creatures to that which is good and honest and none at all to evill Neither is the doctrine of Dominicus Soto alone but the common doctrine of the Divines of Salamancha as Molina confesseth in his disputation 23. And albeit Molina the Jesuite were of another opinion Yet Vasquius the Jesuite professeth that he was ever of the same minde with Dominicus Soto and the Divines of Salamancha in this In his 129 disputation upon the first part of his Summes As for Prosper he hath no such argument But first observe the Objection whereunto he answereth was made against the Doctrine of Austin as the Authour acknowledgeth Whence it followeth that looke
abstaine from sinne when such a grace is granted him and consequently in granting such a grace he permits him still to sinne as well as in denying it and in denying he permits him to doe good as much as in granting it So that still it is not God that keepeth a man from sinne as often as he abstaineth from it but merely the power of his own free will Whereby it is evident that this Authour as well denies that God is the Authour of any good as that he is the Authour of any evill But man is Authour of the one as well as of the other The power of doing good he will grant is from God neither can it be denied but that the power of doing evill is from God He will grant likewise that God is ready to concurre to any good act if man will and I presume he will not deny but that God concurres also to the substance of every evill act The only difference that remaines is this God perswades only to good and disswades only that which is evill Now this third and last assertion we grant as well as he Yet he layes to our charge that we make God the Authour of evill but cares not at all how he denies God to be the Authour of any good in the actions of men and makes noe place for any grace save such as is hortatory which is performed usually by the ministery of men Yet consider what Bradwardine sometimes Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Elect hath written in this kind before Luther or Calvin were borne The title of the fourth chapter of his second booke is this That free will being tempted cannot of his own strength without the helpe of God and his grace overcome any temptation Of the first this that free will strengthned with what created grace soever cannot without another speciall succour of God overcome any temptation of the sixth this that That speciall succour of God is the unconquerable grace of God Of the seventh this That no man though not tempted can by the strength of his free will alone without created grace or with created grace how great soever it be without the speciall asistance of God avoide any sin all these propositions he demonstrates with variety of argument Behold the ingenuity of this Authour He flies in the face of Calvin and Beza and other our Divines for maintaining that unlesse God by his grace keep and preserve a man effectually from sinning it cannot be that he should abstaine from sinne Bradwardine maintained the same before any of these were borne yet he saith nothing to him le ts all his arguments alone but upbraides us for maintaining the same doctrine without giving any reason to convict us of our errour Adde to this which I have omitted the Corolary of that seventh chapter in Bradwardin formerly mentioned is this That it is the will of God which preserves them that are tempted from falling and them that are not tempted both from temptation and from sinne Not one of the arguments whereby he confirmes any of these positions doth this Authour goe about to answer In like manner Alvarez Positâ permissione divinâ infallibiliter peccat homo upon supposition of God's permission man sins infallibly The proposition he intends to prove in that disputation is this Therefore a man is not converted because he is not aided of God But both he and we deny that hereupon a man sinneth necessarily alwaies but only in some cases In some cases it followeth as namely a man borne in sinne and in the state of corruption the naturall fruits whereof are infidelity and impenitency untill God affords a man the grace of regeneration he cannot believe he cannot repent They that are in the flesh cannot please God Thou after the hardnesse of thy heart that cannot repent Therefore they could not believe In which case God is not the cause of infidelity and impenitency but these proceed naturally and necessarily from that originall corruption wherein they are conceived and borne God is only the naturall cause why this their naturall corruption continues uncured For none can cure it but God it being a work nothing inferior to the raising of them from the dead Yet he is no culpable cause of this For as much as he is not bound to any but he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth So that necessarily without the grace of regeneration every man continueth in his naturall corruption devoyd of faith of hope and love These being supernaturall and whereunto no man can attaine with out supernaturall grace In like manner hence it followeth that no naturall man can performe any morall good act in a gracious acceptable manner in the sight of God because â—he fountaines of such performances are not found in naturall men But they have a free power as to commit any naturall evill worke so to abstaine from it though not in a gracious manner Free power as to abstaine from any vertuous act so to performe it also though not in a gracious manner They may be temperate chast just and the like but their vertuous actions are not truly vertues in a Christian account because they know not God nor Christ much lesse doe they believe in him and performe these vertuous actions out of their love unto him If Maccovius and Whitaker and Pareus be of the same mind and the Dominicans with them and Bradwardine before them all let the indifferent Reader consider what an hungry opposition is made by this Authour not offering to answer any one of their Arguments nor of mine neither in my Vindiciae Nor saith ought by way of reply upon any answer to the like argument of Arminius The resolution of all that here he delivers determining in a rule himselfe proposeth without reason or authority to justifie it A rule as here it is applyed conteining a notorious untruth For causa deficiens in no case can be efficiens in proper speech any more then causa efficiens can be accounted deficiens unlesse it be understood in divers kinds As for example efficiens naturaliter may be deficiens moraliter and deficiens moraliter may be efficiens naturaliter An efficient cause naturally may be deficient morally and so a cause deficient morally may be efficient naturally Least of all can it have place in the present question which is of the cause of sinne For sinne as sinne evill as evill non habet causam efficientem sed deficientem hath no cause efficient but deficient only as Austin hath long agoe determined and it is a rule generally received and never that I know denied of any Againe causa deficiens in necessariis may be culpable I confesse and so interpretativè as they say may be interpreted to be as good as an efficient As in a civill consideration it is said of the Magistrate that Qui non vetat peccare cum possit jubet He that forbiddeth not a man to sinne when it
impose or can impose any such necessity on things neither are creatures capable of such necessity But if we speake of such necessity as creatures are capable of under the divine liberty by causes intermediate it is to be said that all things doe not come to passe of necessity but some doe and some doe not God will have some things come to passe by the mediation of causes necessary those come to passe necessarily Others come to passe by the mediation of causes contingent and those come to passe contingently Whereby saith he 't is manifest that they say not well who say that all things come to passe of necessity in reference to the Divine will because as hath been shewed in respect of the Divine will all things come to passe freely and therefore speaking absolutely they may not come to passe although upon supposition that they are willed they cannot but come to passe but this is only necessity upon supposition 1. Indeed if men did sinne against their wills and virgins sometimes are ravished men are slaine by force full sore against their wills they deserved no punishment But is it possible that a man can will that which is evill against his will Every ordinary Scholar in the University knowes that axiome Voluntas non potest cogi the will cannot be forced Lipsius his speech fatali culpae fatalis poena fatall faults have fatall punishments this Authour saith is but a mere crotchet contrary to reason As if he would teach the very maintainers of fate yea the very first to understand themselves For fate wherewith our doctrine is charged by our opposites is commonly called Fate Stoicall Now Zeno was the father of the Stoicks yet when his servant was taken playing the theife pleaded for himselfe saying it was my destiny to steale Zeno answeared him in his own language that it was his destiny to smart for it too right in this same sense that Lipsius spake Yet Zeno knew full well that he punished his servant freely And Zeno is well knowne to have been a great Master of morality for all this which could not consist with denying the liberty of man's will as this Authour well knowes And Austin censureth those who feared to subject the will to all manner of necessity as men transported with vaine and causelesse feares manifesting thereby that some necessity may very well consist with a man's liberty Magistrates though they believe with Austin that Not any thing comes to passe unlesse Allmighty God will have it come to passe And with the Church of Ireland that God from all eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever should in time come to passe And with Aquinas that the roote of contingency is the effectuall will of God yet may they well thinke it reasonable enough to punish offences seing that God decrees that some things even all the actions of men shall come to passe contingently as well as other things shall come to passe necessarily For to come to passe contingently is to come to passe avoidably and if they be the actions of men freely also It is incredible that any sober man should remissely punish faults for the exorbitancy strength sake of the passions whereby they were committed but rather in consideration of the potent causes which raised such passions in them under a colour of justice And we commonly say the greater the temptation is the lesse is the sin So Peter surprised suddainly with feare denied his Master Yet what saith Aristotle In some things no force is suffecient for excuse but a man ought to dy rather any manner of death then commit them For those things in Euripedes are rediculous which moved Alcmaeon to kill his mother Indeed Plato maintained that things done through passion were not voluntary But Aristotle a better Master then he disproves it and by excellent reasons confirmes the contrary And whatsoever Popilius the Roman Pretor judged of her who slew her mother provoked by her Mothers fact in murthering her children yet let our lawes be consulted and the opinion of our Judges in such a case and whether such a one were not to be condemned and whether Popilius his judgment deserves to be admitted for the correction of the lawes of our land and working a reformation in this particular We should soone have a wild world if every one being provoked by the insolencies of others should thrust themselves into the throne of God for the execution of vengeance Yet none more unfit for this then the daughter to execute God's vengeance upon the mother that bare her Yet it was wont to be held If I forget not that potestas patria originally was power of life and death But all is fish that comes to this Authour's net like as her fact who poisoned her husband and son for killing a son of hers destroying two for one without all authority most unnaturally and that not hastily but in a deliberate way by poisoning And doth it become Christians to admire such heathenish courses of men nothing acquainted with the divine providence And was this so doubtfull a case whether so wicked a wretch avenging her selfe by poison secretly given upon her husband and son for the death of another son of hers that the sentencing thereof should be put over untill an 100 yeares after But what of all this These willfully affect revenge the execution whereof belongs not to them but it is just with God to punish sinne with sinne one man's sinne by another As of Senacherib the Lord professeth that he would cause him to fall by the sword in his own land this was brought to passe by his own children falling upon him furiously and as unnaturally as the actions of any of these How was innocent Naboth used and by publique sentence condemned to be stoned to death and accordingly executed by the practise of wicked Iezabel Yet Solomon spareth not to professe that every man's judgment commeth of the Lord. Never were more abominable courses executed upon any then upon the holy son of God Yet these were all foredetermined by the hand of God and the counsell of God as the Apostles with one voice acknowledge By the same providence was Ioseph sold into Egypt God working thereby the preservation of them that sold him Thus Sihon was hardened and the Canaanites and the Egyptians with Pharaoh their King to their own destruction Thus the Lord punished David's foule sinne by the murther of Amnon contrived by his own brother and by the sword of Absolon rising up against his own father and by the sword of Shimei's tongue cursing David wherein David acknowledged the hand of God Thus he punished the Idolatry of the Gentiles by giving them over to vile affections and so prostituting them to abominable courses What outrages were committed by Senacherib that proud and blasphemous wretch upon the people of God yet is he called the rod of God's wrath and the staffe in his hand is
holinesse and maketh him the principall cause of sin in the greatest number of men I know that the defender of it doth not thinke so For the maine reason which moved the Synod of Dort some other Divines before and since to bring downe predestination thus low and begin their Reprobation after the fall was that they might maintaine a fatall and absolute Reprobation of men and yet avoid this imputation as Doctor Twisse hath noted But what they intended for ought that I can see they have not compassed For it followeth evident enough even from their conclusions too that of all the sins of reprobates which are the greatest number by many degrees God is the true and principall Authour Two things they say which taken together methinks inferre it 1. That God of his own will and pleasure hath brought men into an estate in which they cannot avoid sinne 2ly That he leaveth the Reprobate irrecoverably in it 1. That God of his own will and pleasure hath brought men into an estate in which they cannot possibly avoid sinne that is into the state of originall sinne which consists of two parts 1. The guilt of Adam's transgression 2. The corruption of nature In both these they say mankind is interessed not through the force and efficiency of naturall generation because we all derive our nature from Adam as our first principle but by God's free and voluntary order and impuration It came not to passe by any naturall meanes saith Calvin that all men fell from salvation by the fault of our first parem That all men are held under the guilt of eternall death in the person of one man it is the cleare and constant voice of Scripture Now this cannot be ascribed to any naturall cause it must therefore come from the wonderfull councell of God A little after he hath the same againe with as great an Emphasis How is it that so many nations with their children should be involved in the fall without remedy but because God would have it so As roundly doth Doctor Twisse affirme the same The guilt of originall sinne is derived unto us only by imputation the filth only by propagation and both these only by God's free constitution A little before he hath these words The fault of our nature commeth rom God's free appointment For he doth not cut of any necessity but of his mere will only impute the sinne of Adam to us To this purpose he speaketh a great deale more in the same place To these sayings Saint Bernard hath the like speaking of Adam's sinne he saith Adam's sinne is anothers because we knew not of it and yet ours because it was through the just though secret judgment of God reputed ours And this that they say is agreable to reason For if we be fallen into the guilt of the first sinne and the corruption of nature only because we were in Adam's loines when he sinned and derive our being from him then these two things will follow 1. That we stand guilty of all the sinâ— which Adam committed from his fall to his lives end For we were vertually in his loines as well after his fall as before and in every passage and variation of his life he was still a principle of mankind But where doe we read that we are guilty of any other of his sins To the nâ—st sin only doth the Scripture entitle that sin and misery which entred into the world and invaded all mankind as we may see Rom 5. 15. 16. 17 c. 2. That children are guilty of the sins of all their progenitours especially of their immediate parents For they were in their loines when they sinned and more immediatly then in Adam's But children are not guilty of their parents faults nor obnoxious to their punishments because they are their children as we may see Exod 20. 5. where God saying that he will visit the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of them hate him plainly implyeth that children are not simply charged with their fathers sins but conditionally if they be haters of God as their fathers were if by imitating their wicked parents they become partakers of their sins In Ezech 18 14 c. The Lord signifieth thus much in his Apology against the cavill of the Jewes For first he saith that if a wicked man begetteth a son that seet his fathers sins doth not the like he shall not die for the iniquiry of his father This implyeth that the derivation of being from the patent doth not render the child obnoxious to the punishment of the fathers sin nor consequently to the sinne For the good child is not obnoxious and yet the good child is equally in the fathers loines with the bad and equally receiveth nature and being from him And then the Lord tells them expresly thus much in two propositions 1. Affirmatively The soule that sinneth it shall die And that it may be known that he speaks exclusively only the soule that sinneth shall dye he delivers his mind 2. Negatively The Son shall not beare the iniquity of the father neither shall the father beare the iniquity of her Sonne c. Our Saviour in that woefull speech of his to the Pharisees Fulfill ye also the measure of your fathers Behold I send unto you Prophets c. them ye shall kill and crucifie that on you may come all the righteous blood c. Intimateth apparently that the Pharisees were not inheritours of their fathers sins punishments by birth but by the commission and imitation of their fathers sins they came to inherit both their sins and plagues Miserable would our case be on whom the ends of the world are coÌ„e if children should be guilty of all their Ancestours prevatications What a world of sins should we be to answer for personall sins parents progenitours sins to a thousand past generations A thing with no reason to be imagined This is the first thing Whereas I am quoted here to give the reason which moved the Synod of Dort and some other Divines to begin Reprobation after the fall namely this to avoid the imputation of making God the Authour of sinne I doubt this Authour hath so long inured himselfe to leasings that it is growne naturall unto him to deliver untruthes For first I make no mention in that fourth Digres of mine in the matter of predestination of the Synod of Dort neither indeed were they the Objects of my thoughts in this particular That Digression of mine is spent in answering the arguments of those who dispute against Massa nondum condita and stand for massa corrupta to be the object of election and reprobation In the first chapter I make answer to Mr. Elnathan Parre in an English tract of his wherein he deales upon this argument In the second chap I deale with others that make choice of the lower way because it seemes to be the easiest
way which I expresse in the very words of Mr. Doctor Abbats Bishop of Sarisbury ere he died and I conceived that indeed this motive prevailed with most and therefore I thought good so much the more throughly to discusse that But doe I say they tooke this course to free God from the imputation of sinne Nothing lesse my words are these in the Digression cap. 2. Quod plurimos movet illud est nimirum quod in sententia illâ de massâ nondum conditâ omnia sint ut aiunt intricata perplexa infinitis difficultatibus involuta in hac verò de massâ corruptà predestinationi hominum praestruendâ contra clara sint omnia cum Scripturarum autoritate judicioque antiquitatis planissimè consentientia where I mention two reasons that moved them to take this way 1. This in that opinion concerning the Masse of mankind not yet created all passages are intricate perplext and intangled with infinite difficulties but in the opinion concerning the Masse corrupt all things are cleare 2. This that in this other opinion all things are most plainly found to agree both with the authority of Scriptures and with the judgment of antiquity Now after I had endeavoured to discover the insufficiency of this plea in the second and third chapter of that fourth Digression in the matter of predestination In the fourth chapter I propose mine own judgment concerning the true benefit of this way in making the corrupt masse of mankind the object of election and reprobation not the judgment of others as this Authour carrieth the matter but mine own judgment For thus I beginne Ad extremum vis liberè pronuntiem quid unicè proficiatur ex hac nostrá praedestinationis Objecti sententiae temperatione Dicà m igitur quid sentiam Hinc nimirum efficitur ut à lapsu primorum parentum decreto praedestinationis subjiciendo subordinando liberemur huic unicè provisum esse ab istius quasi mediae temperatioris opinionis assertioribus mihi plusquam probabile aut verisimile videtur ne scililicet alias peccatum fieri statueretur decernente Deo tanquam medium ad fines à Deo in praedestinatione sibi praestitutos accommodatum unde etiam quà m author peccati constituendus sit nullâ solidâ ratione explicari posse videtur In the last place will you give me leave freely to professe what we profic by thus tempering our opinion touching the object of predestination I will therefore deliver what I thinke So that herein I purpose mine own opinion only not the opinion of others Herehence thus we gaine that we are freed from subjecting and subordinating man's fall unto God's decree of predestination It seemes to me more then probable or likely that the maintainers of this middle and temperate openion doe provide only against this inconvenience that is their way doth indeed provide against this and against no other inconvenience in my opinion to wit least otherwise the sinne of Adam should be said to come to passe God willing it as a meanes conducing to those ends which God intended in predestination from whence it followes as it seemes that it cannot be explicated by any solid reason that God is not made the Authour of sinne All which is delivered by me as my opinion conceiving that others thinke so too namely not that God is hereby made the Authour and principall cause of sinne but that the contrary cannot be explicated by any solid reason Now Cajetan confesseth as much namely that in these mysteries all the distinctions that are used doe not quietare intellectum satisfie the understanding and therefore he doth captivate his owne into the obedience of faith And Alvarez justifies him in this professing herein that he speakes doctissimè piissimè most learned and holyly And in a peculiar disputation he maintaines that the mistery of Gods providence and predestination standing with the liberty of our wills is incomprehensible by us in this world Lastly consider this is delivered only of the first sinne of our first parents which this authour perverts most shamefully when he avoucheth that I should acknowledge our Divines many of them to embrace this way to avoyd the imputation of making God the principall cause not of Adams sinne alone but of sinne in the greatest number of men And to confesse a truth if sinne be made the meanes for the procuring of the ends which God intends in predestination undoubtedly God himselfe should be the authour of sinne For whosoever intends any end he and none but he must be authour in working the meanes which tend to this end Therefore I said only that in this case It seemes that the sinne of Adam was intended by God as the meanes Whereas in truth and upon due consideration it appeares that not the creatures sinne but Gods permission of the creatures sinne is the meanes whereby God brings to passe his glorious ends Yet not the permission of sinne alone but joyned together with the pardoning of it and saving his elect in despight of it is the compleat meanes together with the procuring of Christs merits for the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of mercy And in like manner not the permitting of sinne alone but joyned with the punishment of it is the compleat meanes for the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice vindicative which in Scripture phrase is called the declaration of his wrath And whereas I said that hereby it seemed that it could not by any sound reason be manifested that God was not the Authour of sinne by the first way this Authour avoucheth of the defenders of the lower way which seemes most temperate that from their conclusions it followeth evidently that of all the sinnes of Reprobates which are the greatest number by many degrees God is the true and principall Authour Observe this he sayth followeth evidently from their conclusions and forthwith he tells us that he thinks so or to his thinking it doth so And why is he not the Authour of all the sinnes of the elect also whereas originall sinne continues in them also they carry about them a body of death and have cause to complaine of a law in their numbers that rebelleth against the law of their mind and leadeth them captive to the law of sinne Only there is a principle of spirituall life in them that renewes their repentance dayly as their sinnes are renewed but they looke not to be freed from sinne as long as they live in this world But let us examine how well he makes good that which he affirmes of the sinnes of the Reprobate that God is made the Authour of them by our doctrine of Reprobation I find that Cornelius a Lapide a Iesuite shapes Calvines doctrine of election and Reprobation this lower way and imputes unto him that from Reprobation according to his doctrine in Reprobis manat certus necessarius lapsus in peccata quaelibet A certaine and necessary falling into
among heathen men I come to his second position which he casts upon us as dissenting therein from himselfe and it is this That God leaves the Reprobates irrecoverably in it Now on this point I would gladly know his contrary Tenet in what sense it proceeds namely That Reprobates are not left irrecoverably in originall sinne or in such state wherein they cannot avoid sinne For I cannot comprehend his meaning herein But it was wont to be said of Africa that semper aliquid apportat novi alwaies it brings forth some new monster in course of nature So men of this Authour's spirit are alwaies bringing forth some new monster in Divinity For what thinks he was ever any Reprobate recovered out of originall sin Nay was ever any child of God recovered out of it while he lived upon the face of the earth Or doth he thinke himselfe recovered out of it or is it in his power to avoid it Perhaps he will say though he cannot avoid sin originall yet he can avoid sin actuall and so not only the children of God may if they will but even Reprobates also But what may they avoid all sinne or some only What one of our Divines denies that a Reprobate hath power to avoid fornication We see heathens doe avoid it Or stealth For heathens doe so Or murther Even heathens have been found very morall and that generally But this we say All men in the state of nature whether they doe good as touching the substance of the act yet they doe it not in a gracious manner Or whether they abstaine from that which is evill they doe not abstaine from it in a gracious manner nor can doe Nay since the fall of Adam who ever lived free from sinne the Son of God only excepted Doth notholy Paul professe of himselfe saying I doe not the good that I would but the evill that I would not that doe I. To will is present with me but I find not to performe hat which is good And if God may justly damne all for sinne originall as Mr. Hoord affirmes why may not God leave all irrecoverably in it and that justly So that herein I find my selfe in a brake not can devise with my selfe in what tollerable or colourable sense he can affirme that Reprobates are not left irrecoverably in the state of originall sinne or in such a state in which they cannot avoid sinne I say in what sense he can deliver this different from us I cannot devise For we willingly grant that there is no particular actuall sinne from which a Reprobate hath not power to abstaine though he cannot abstaine from it in a gracious manner without grace and that grace we account the grace of regeneration which is a supernaturall principle of gracious actions both as touching faith in God and the love of God to the contempt of our selves Now I guesse his meaning is that no Reprobate is so left and abandoned in originall sinne but that God gives him grace to believe if he will to repent if he will to love God if he will that above all things I guesse I say that this is his meaning but I would have him expresse it that I might see it under his hand For till then I find noe apparent difference between him us as touching these two principles from whence he deduceth that God is thereby made The principall cause of sin in the greatest number of men And if once he deliver himselfe fairely and comes to this the issue of the question to be debated between us will be faire and cleare namely about this their universall grace whether all men elect and Reprobate by vertue of supernaturall grace given unto them have power to beleive if they will repent if they will And against this I will dispute after this manner First in all this there is no difference between us excepting that this power is said to be wrought in man by supernaturall grace For we say with Austin Deo credere ab amore temporalium ad divina praecepta servanda se convertere omnes possunt si velint All men can believe God if they will and from the love of temporall things convert themselves to the keeping of God's commandements if they will For all the moment of inclining a man to workes of morallity lyeth in the will of man And therefore marke what followes in Austin Sed praeparatur voluntas à Domino supple ut velit tantumque augetur munere charitatis ut possit But the will is prepard by the Lord to wit to make it willing and so much augmented by the gift of charity as to make it able And I prove that looke what I supply is according unto Austin interpreting that of the Apostle neque volentis neque currentis sed miserentis Dei it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy For he shewes that the whole both to will and run is to be ascribed unto God qui hominis voluntatem bonam praeparat adjuvandam adjuvat praeparatam who both prepares the good will of man that after he may helpe it and helpes it being once prepared where plainly man swilling that which is good is made the fruit of God's preparing it but because there is in man a will of the flesh resisting this will of the spirit therefore there is need not of grace preparing only but of grace adjuvant and helping also to enable it to doe what it hath a will unto whence immediatly followeth running as well as willing And these two graces praeparant and adjuvant are afterward called by the names of grace prevenient and subsequent thus Nolentem praevenit ut velit volentem subsequitur ne frustra velit Him that is unwilling the Lord preventeth to make him willing and willing he followeth him that he may not will in vaine And that this double grace is required by reason of the reluctancy between the flesh and the Spirit I prove out of the same Austin writing thus Prima gratiâ est quâ fit ut habeat homo justitiam si velit secunda ergo plus potest quâ etiam fit ut velit tantum velit tantoque ardore diligat ut carnis voluntatem contraria concupiscentem voluntate spiritus vincat The first grace is that whereby it comes to passe that a man is righteous if he will The second grace therefore is of more power whereby it comes to passe also that a man doth will and that so resolutely and with such fervency loveth compare this with that of Austin de Gen contrae Manich lib. 1. cap 3. that by the will of the Spirit he overcommeth the will of the flesh fighting against it So that a power to doe good if a man will is one thing to will that which is good is another thing and lastly to be able to doe that which it wills is a third thing yet both these two last are
ministery is a mere imposture because all the inforcements wherewith the tender of salvation unto Reprobates is accompanied is in shew most hearty serious but indued nothing so For what have the elect of God no part in the ministery Or dates he say that by our doctrin these insorcements are nothing hearty serious to them Thou wilt say the Authour's meaning is that the whole ministery is a mere imposture towards reprobates but he saith not so but thus The whole ministery is a mere imposture and afterwards in giving his reason for it he pleads that inforcements in shew hearty serious made to reprobates are nothing so hence he concludes that the whole ministery is a mere imposture without any distinctiō of persons to whom it is a mere imposture 4. Yet I willingly confesse that it is foul enough that God's courses should be courses of imposture towards any even towards reprobates But how doth he prove that God takes any such course with reprobates To whom hath God sent his word vouchsafed the ministery hereof according to all the enforcements mētioned accompanying his tender of salvation unto them is it not unto his Church What is the preserment of the Jew above the Gentile much every way saith Paul chiefly because unto thē were committed the Oracles of God And was the Church of Jewes a Church of reprobates Were they not the City of God but the city of the Devill If these enforcements had been used to the Nativites there had been some colour for such an imputation but seing 〈…〉 of God's word in all these enforcements is used to the people of God his pretious people chosen out of the world to put his name among'st them shall this ministery be so carryed as concerning reprobates All that he hath to say for this is no other but that a great part or the most part of the people to whom he sends his prophets are reprobates Be it so but how doth he prove that God intends this ministery for the salvation of reprobates or that he intends it at all for them If God commands them as he commanded Ieremiah saying Goe cry in the eares of Jerusalem Thus saith the Lord they must doe so without difference For they are not able to put a difference between the Elect and Reprobate to know who are the one and who are the other Austin was willing to pray for all but yet he professeth that if they knew who they were whō God had ordained unto damnation they would pray no more for them then for the Devill himself so that either the Prophets were not of Austin's mind or else that they thought that their ministery in God's purpose and appointment tended to the salvatiō only of Gods elect But because they knew not who they are therefore they prayed for all and used their ministeriall enforcements indifferently towards all But like enough this Authour will deny that the Prophets were of Austin's mind Therefore I will prove they were in this The Prophets were undoubtedly of St. Paul's mind but St. Paul was of St. Austin's mind in this therefore the Prophets also were of St. Austin's mind Now that St. Paul was of St. Austin's mind and that his ministery though performed towards all yet was intended for the salvation only of God's elect I prove thus Though I be free from all men yet have I made my selfe a servant unto all men that I might winne the more Observe he doth not say that he might winne all Againe I became all things to all men that I might save some Who are these some at whose salvation he aimes I answer they are God's elect and none but they and this I prove out of those words of his where he saith Therefore I suffer all things for the elects sake that they might also obtaine salvation which is in Christ Iesus with eternall glory Now if his sufferings were for their sakes undoubtedly his whole ministery was for their sakes for this alone brought his sufferings upon him The holy Ghost witnesseth in every City saying that bonds and afflictions abide me But I passe not at all neither is my life deare unto my selfe so that I may fulfill my course with joy and the ministration that I have received to testifie the Gospell of the grace of God 5. But be it that God intends it for Reprobates also yet not for their salvation But first to take away excuse from them as to this purpose he sent Ezechiel Son of man I send thee to a rebellious nation For they are impudent children I doe send thee unto them and thou shalt say unto them Thus saith the Lord God but surely they will not heare neither indeed will they cease for they are a rebellious house yet shall they know that there hath been a Prophet among them Or otherwise as Austin hath observed ut proficiant ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur that they may profit to an outward amendment of their lives that their punishment may be the lesse And consider whether in all this he doth not openly invade not so muchour doctrine as the manifest evidence of God's word For it is apparent that God gives commands to those whose hearts he means to harden that they shall not obey those commands though those commands were not made in a cold manner but with strongest enforcements Thou shalt say to Praraoh thus saith the Lord Israel is my son even my first borne wherefore I say to thee let my son goe that he may serve me If thou refuse to let him goe behold I will slay thy son even thy first borne Yet before this he told Moses saying I will harden his heart and he shall not let the people goe And after this The Lord hardned the heart of Pharaoh and he hearkned not unto them as the Lord had said to Moses And hereupon the Lord deales with him in the way of greater enforcement then before For the Lord said unto Moses Rise up early in the morning and stand before Pharaoh and tell him Thus saith the Lord God of the Hebrews let my people goe that they may serve me For I will at this time send all mine plagues upon thine heart and upon thy servants and upon thy people that thou maiest know that there is none like me in all the earth For now will I stretch out mine hand that I may smite thee and thy people with pestilence and thou shalt perish from the earth And indeed for this cause have I appointed thee to shew my power in thee to declare my name thoroughout all the world Yet thou exaltest thy selfe against my people and lettest thē not goe Behold tomorrow this time I will cause to raine a mighty great hayle such as was not in Egypt since the foundation of it was laid And The lord said unto Moses Goe to Pharach for I have hardned his heart and
their p. 47 l. 2 praeoptat l. 23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 48 l. 5 6 degree l. 8 degree of diminution l 10 any paine p. 49. l. 18 my argument p. 50. l. 7 in this l. 22 will p. 51. l. 22 the corrupt p 53. l. 33. permittente Deo p 55 l. 1 But God by this opinion doth will and procure it by a powerfull and effectuall decree which cannot be resisted p. 56 l. 5 this will l 53 signes of p. 57 l 8 God p. 59 l. 9 of Thomas p. 60 l 16 as holily p. 61 l. 45 is just p. 62. l. 4 restraines ib l. 14 good works l. 22 that therefore God l. 28. double evill l. 48 for it by p. 63 l. 5 Potan p. 64 l. 7 efficacy of l 16 supposition l. 18 necessarily but either necessarily or c. l. 19 supposition l. 24 of Aquinas l. 26 on Gods Marg pro culpa p. 65. l. 34 quotation l. 45 to feare l. 48. emortui sarmenti quia Christo resecti sunt l. 49 multi p. 66 l. 7 saith not l. 12 nill that l. 25 futurition l. 47 from sin l. 56 or whither he abstaine from that which is evill he doeth not abstaine from it in a gracious manner p. 67 l. 12 this of l. 24 you hearts l. 51. mans infidelity p. 68 l. 57. manner of appointing hereunto for if they be at all appointed hereunto undoubtedly they are precisely appointed thereunto p. 69 l. 12 supposition p. 70 l. 28 second way p. 73 l. 24 as we l. 44 severally p. 74 l. 46 author of the Sin l. 48 del good p. 76. l. 13 will not p. 78. l. 3 futurition l. 29 procure l. 30 as a second p 80 l. 12 of England l. 22 but we l. 31 against l. 38 if he should worke them contrary to their natures then c. p. 81 l. 7 effecting p. 83 l. 29 of sin p. 84 l. 24 acts p. 85 l. 1 any naturall act l. 50 mere pleasure as the apostle professeth that God hath mercy on whom he will it is evident that God of his mere pleasure c. p. 86 l. 18 as uncapable p. 89. l. 59 nec recte p 93 l. 30 will doe p. 94 l. 2 nill it p. 97 l. 36 the cause l. 54. my answer p. 100 l. 44 with their p 102 l. 56 and that p. 104 l. 4 Credible p 105 l 2 agent p. 118 l. 41 or vitious p. 121 l. 41 will of p. 127 l. 14 of destiny p. 134 l. 44 asserâ—oribus l. 47 quin author l. 50 I propose p. 140 l. 21 so as to come to passe p 146 l. 22 pillar had not l. 23 del pillar had p. 147 l ult why God p. 151 l. 38 so p. 157 l. 7 without which p. 164 l. 56 it may p. 186 l. 47 decrees p. 193 l. 2 wherein 't is manifest that finall perseverance in sin goeth before l. 3 But if you farther proceed to make it good according to your usuall course thus finall perseverance in sin goeth before damnation Ergo c p 195 l. 35 mine l. 54 decrees p. 198 l. 36 is in p. 199 l 10 and some l. 11. privatively A VINDICATION OF Dr. TWISSE FROM THE EXCEPTIONS OF M r JOHN GOODWIN IN HIS Redemption Redeemed BY HENRY IEANES Minister of Gods Word in Chedzoy OXFORD Printed for T. Robinson 1653. TO THE Reverend and Learned Mr IOHN GOODWIN SIR I Have assumed so much boldnesse as to examine some passages that you have in your Booke entituled Redemption Redeemed against D. Twisse wherein I believe that you your selfe will acknowledg that I have carried my selfe as a fair adversary as an adversary only unto your opinions and not unto your person which I love honour as in other respects so for the good and great gifts and parts God hath bestowed on you Many of my friends have earnestly disswaded me from this vindicatioÌ„ assuring me that I must expect from you insteed of a reply nothing but a libell But for my part I shall hope and pray unto the Almighty for better things of you However I am not hereby deterred from entring into the lists with you However I am not hereby deterred from entring into the lists with you neither shall I deprecate your utmost severity in rationall argumentation for the discovery of any thing that you conceive to be weake and unsound in this my discourse You may perhaps think and say that so small a trifle is unworthy a diversion from your more serious employments but for that I am contented that the learned Reader judge betwixt us Indeed I had long ere this finished an answer unto your whole Book but that there was a generall and as I think a just expectation that some in the University of Cambridge who dissented from you would comply with your faire invitation of them to declare themselves in some worthy and satisfactory answer to the particulars propounded in your Book But upon their long silence which I can neither excuse nor will I accuse as being altogether ignorant of the causes thereof I renewed my thoughts of setting about this worke and intended in the interim to have annexed to this piece of D. Twisse a Table referring unto such passages in this and other of his Books as doe in great part satisfy whatsoever you have delivered in your forementioned Treatise in opposition unto the absolutenesse of Divine Reprobation But from these resolutions I was quite taken off by certain information that the Learned M. Kendall heretofore Fellow of Exeter Colledge in the University of Oxford hath undertaken you But I detaine you and the reader too long with Prefacing I shall therefore presently without more adoe addresse my selfe unto the encounter with you In three places you except against D. Twisse I shall consider them severally To begin with the first M r GOODWIN p. 25. 26. c. 2. §. 20. IT is indeed the judgement of some Learned men that the purpose or intent of God to permit or suffer such or such a thing to be done or such or such an accident to come to passe supposeth a necessity at least a syllogisticall or consequentiall necessity of the coming of it to passe But that the truth lieth on the other side of the way appears by the light of this consideration If whatsoever God hath decreed or intendeth to permit to come to passe in any case upon any termes or any supposition whatsoever should by vertue of such an intention or decree necessarily come to passe then all things possible to be or at least ten thousand things more than ever shall be must be yea and this necessarily For doubtlesse God hath decreed and intendeth to leave naturall causes generally to their naturall and proper operations and productions yea and voluntary causes also under a power and at liberty to act ten thousand things more then ever they will doe or shall doe For example God intendeth and hath decreed to permit that fire