of his Scene whereunto it is fit he should be serviceable And as for the two Articles here mentioned wherein they are said unanimously to agree and which he calls maxima gravamina It is true they doe agree herein but it may be in a farre other sense then he is willing should be taken notice of For as for the first 1. That the moving cause of reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall 1. This is true in proportion to election that like as no good work of man is the moving cause of election but only the will of God so no sinne or evill work of man is the cause of reprobation but only the will of God 1. That so it is of election the Apostle both 1. Saith Election is not of Workes but of him that calleth 2. And proveth thus Before Esau and Iacob were borne or had done good or evill it was said The Elder shall serve the Younger therefore Election is not of Workes that is of good workes but of him that calleth 2. That so it is of reprobation I prove by the same argument of the Apostle thus Before Esau and Iacob were borne or had done good or evill it was said the Elder shall serve the Younger therefore reprobation stands not of workes that is of evill workes but of the meer pleasure of God 1. And like as this is farther evident by Gods course of calling in the point of Election as the Apostle intimateth for as much as God calleth effectually whom he will in bestowing faith and repentance upon them For as the Apostle afterwards professeth He hath mercy on whom he will 2. So it is as evident in the point of reprobation in as much as God refuseth to call whom he will by denying faith and repentance unto them as afterwards the same Apostle professeth saying that God hardneth whom he will 2. And this doctrine we doe explicate by distinguishing that which our Adversaries desire to confound least their cheating carriage should be discovered as formerly I have shewed For Predestination and Reprobation may be considered either quoad Praedestinantis Reprobantis actum or quoad Praedestinationis Reprobationis terminum as much as to say quoad res praedestinatione reprobatione praeparatas that is either as touching the act of Predestination and Reprobation or as touching the things decreed by Predestination or Reprobation Now as touching the act of Predestination never any man saith Aquinas was so mad as to say that the merits of man are the cause of predestination And why so Because the act of predestination is the act of Gods will and formerly saith he I have shewed that there can be no cause of the will of God as touching the act of God willing but only as touching the things willed by God Now apply this to reprobation For is not reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating the very act also of Gods will This cannot be denied and herehence it followes that like as there can be no cause of Gods will as touching the act of God willing so there can be no cause of reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And like as it was a mad thing in Aquinas his judgement to say that merits were the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating so it is no lesse madnesse in his judgement to maintain that either sinne originall or actuall can be the meritorious cause of reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And what are the reasons hereof in School-divinity Why surely these 1. Predestination and Reprobation are eternall but good workes and evill workes of the creature are temporall but impossible it is that a thing temporall can be the cause of that which is eternall 2. The act of Predestination and Reprobation is the act of Gods will and the act of Gods will like as the act of his knowledge is the very essence of God even God himselfe and therefore to introduce a cause of Gods will is to bring in a cause of God himselfe 3. If works or faith foreseen be any moving cause of Divine election then either they are so of their own nature or by the meer constitution of God Not of their own nature as it is apparent therefore by the constitution of God but this cannot stand neither For if by the constitution of God then it would follow that God did constitute that upon foresight of mans faith he would elect him that is ordaine him to salvation And what I pray is to constitute Is it any other then to ordaine And herehence it followeth God did ordaine that upon foresight of mans faith he would ordaine him unto salvation Whereby the eternall ordination of God is made the object of his eternall ordination whereas it is well known and generally received that nothing but that which is temporall can be the object of divine ordination which is eternall In like sort I dispute of reprobation if sinne be the cause thereof then either of its own nature it is the cause thereof or by the ordinance of God Not of its own nature as all are ready to confesse if you say by the ordinance of God then it follows God did ordaine that upon the foresight of mans sinne he would ordaine him unto damnation For reprobation is Gods ordaining a man unto damnation as touching one part of the things decreed thereby which we come to consider in the next place and that both in election and in reprobation having hitherto considered them as touching the act of God electing or reprobating and shewed that thus they can have no cause But as touching the things decreed thereby they may have a cause as Aquinas professeth and we professe with him As for example to begin with election The things decreed or destinated to a man in election are two Grace and Glory Now both these may have a cause For both Grace is the cause of glory and Christs merits are the cause both of grace and glory But let grace be rightly understood For in the confuse notion of grace many are apt to lurke thereby to shut their eyes against the evidence of truth For no marvail if men be in love with their own errours and in proportion to the love of errour such is their hatred of Divine truth opposite thereunto Now by grace we understand the grace of regeneration whereby that naturall corruption of mind and will commonly called blindnesse of mind and hardnesse of heart which we all bring into the world with us through originall sin is in part cured More distinctly we call this grace the grace of faith and repentance whereby our naturall infidelity and impenitency is cured Now this grace we say God bestowes on whom he will finding all equall in infidelity and impenitency For so the Apostle tells us that God hath mercy on whom he will And as God bestowes it on whom he will not finding any
shewed because both are eternall and the act of Gods will which is God himselfe and withall to devise a cause hereof is to cast our selves upon an unavoydable absurdity as namely to say That God did ordaine that upon the foresight of this or that in men he would ordaine some of them to solvation and others unto damnation And indeed the harshnesse of the Tenent consists chiefly in confounding these different considerations whereby a colour is cast as if we maintained that God did decree to damne men of his meere pleasure and not for sin 2. As touching the second which is this That the finall impenitency and damnation of reprobates are necessary and unavoydable by Gods absolute decree Here as it were to make weight impenitency and damnation are clapt together as unavoydable by Gods absolute decree whereas it is without all question that supposing impenitency to be finall damnation is unavoydable by the Law of God as who hath ordained that whosoever dies in impenitency shall be damned And as for impenitency doth this Author or any Arminian deny it to be a fruit of that originall corruption wherein all are borne I perswade my selfe they doe not Corvinus professeth of all That by the sinne of Adam they are conjecti in necessitatem peccandi Then againe doth he maintaine that any is able to cure this but God It seems he doth not by that which followeth where he signifieth that God in his opinion did not absolutely intend to leave men to that woefull estate wherein they were borne What then Will he have God bound to cure it in all If so then certainly he doth cure it in all For it were impossible God should not doe that whereunto he is obliged in the way of justice But nothing more manifest then that God doth not cure it in all therefore certainly he is not bound to cure it in all But I imagine he conceives that God is ready to cure it in all and it is mans fault that he doth not cure it in any As much as to say if man would doe somewhat which he may doe then God would give him repentance Here is good stuffe towards and undoubtedly this is the criticall point as touching the nature of efficacious grace Yet this I know full well how carefull the greatest Rabbies amongst the Arminians are to decline And will it not manifestly follow herehence that the grace of repentance is given secundum merita according to some good work of man that went before Which was condemned in the Synode of Palestine above 1200 years agoe Nay what will you say if their doctrine hereabouts in the issue thereof comes to this namely that God doth work in man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle credere modo Velit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle resipiscere modò Velit as I can shew it under the hand of one and I have cause to suspect that it comes also from another manner of hand then his with whom I have had to deale with And in this case it shall not be true that God shews mercy on whom he will in giving faith and repentance but rather he shall shew mercy on whom man will And like as when a question is made why such a man is rewarded by the Magistrate no wise man will answer because it is the pleasure of the Magistrate so to reward him but rather represent the cause on mans part why he was reward so if God shews mercy in giving repentance according to some preparation found in one man rather then in another it shall not be said that God hath mercy on whom he will but rather the reason on mans part is to be represented why God doth give him repentance Yet these Petitions he calls maxima gravamina on the part of Reprobation And will he not give us leave to propose in proportion hereunto our maxima gravamina as touching their opinion in point of election namely 1. That it is not the meer pleasure of God but the faith and repentance of a man foreseen that is the moving cause of divine election 2. And that every man hath power to believe and repent and no man hath more cause to be thankfull unto God for giving him any more grace to believe and repent in the way of grace preventing then he gives to reprobates I speak of reprobate men but for ought I yet know to the contrary I may as well deliver it of the reprobate Angells And as touching that which they call grace subsequent which is only Gods concurrence seeing God affords that to any sinfull act they may thank themselves rather then God for that like as for Gods concurrence unto any act of sinne These doctrines are no gravamina to the tender consciences of our Adversaries The doctrine opposite to this which here he dislikes must needs be this God hath not absolutely purposed from eternity of his meer will and pleasure but upon consideration of actuall continuance in sinne and unbeliefe to cast off men from grace and glory Now this actuall continuance in unbeliefe I presume must be finall and upon the consideration hereof God casts them off from grace but I pray from what grace surely from the grace of faith otherwise it stands not in any contradiction to our Tenent So that their doctrine in the issue comes to this Whom God foresees that they will not believe unto death he decrees that they shall not believe unto death and applied unto repentance thus Whom God foresees that they will not repent unto death he decreeth that they shall not repent unto death This is the sober and savoury doctrine of these impugners of the grace of God and yet they perceive not what a spirit of giddinesse possesseth them in this It is without question I think that God leaves many in that woefull estate which here is called corruption of nature no more without any specification wherein it consists the guilt whereof is eternall death and seeing that if he so leaves them it cannot be denied but that God intended so to leave them All the question is Whether God did absolutely intend to leave them Now had this Author as he professeth his dislike of Gods absolue intention hereof so dealt clearly and shewed how he did intend so to leave some as namely upon what condition or upon foresight whereof and withall given some proofe of his assertion his ingenuity had been commendable Yet we say that God did not at all intend to leave men in this state For the terme men in this place being indefinite it is capable of truth either way And this Author defines not whether he speaks of some or of all We willingly grant he doth not leave his elect in that woefull state but brings them out of it by faith and repentance which are expressely called the gifts of God in holy Scripture But as for Reprobates I doe not find he gives either faith or repentance unto them And Austin lib. 5. contra Julian
themselves God took not that pleasure in them as to give them his custodient grace to keep them from withdrawing themselves which grace and that out of his good pleasure he afforded unto others But this grace comes in no account throughout with this Author like unto the Remonstrants who would have no other notice taken of any other counsell of God then that whereby he decreeth to save believers and damne unbelievers But if you call them to enquire of Gods decree to bestow the grace of Faith and repentance upon some and not on others as whether it proceeds absolutely or conditionally they usually lend a deafe eare to this whereby it is as cleare as the Sunne what estimation they make of the grace of regeneration of the grace of Faith and of repentance and after what manner they give God the glory of it By the way observe I pray how he makes the state of man in being a reprobate consequent to his withdrawing himselfe which undoubtedly is a Temporall act and accordingly the act of Reprobation whereby a man is denominated a reprobate to be meerely Temporall and consequently such an act must election be also viz. not eternall but Temporall Still he keepeth himselfe in his strength of confusion as most advantageous for him as in saying God forsakes no man till by actuall sinnes and continuance in them he forsaketh God But albeit God forsaketh no man as touching the inflicting of punishment untill man commits actuall sinne and continueth therein impenitently yet before this God did forsake him as touching the denyall of this grace custodient from sinne and the denyall of the grace of repentance to rise out of sinne which yet he grants to many as in shewing mercy to whom he will like as whom he will he hardneth and so accordingly cures in some that naturall infidely and hardnesse of heart wherein we are all borne and leaves it uncured in others Now consider we his argument following which is this If God reject no man from salvation in time or in act and deed till he reject God then surely he rejected no man in purpose and decree but such a one as he foresaw would reject and cast off God Now this argument not one of our Divines deny not only as it is applied to reprobation but neither doe we deny it applied unto election For we willingly professe that like as God bestowes salvation on none but such as he then findes believers penitent and given to good works in like sort wee all professe that God decrees to bestow salvation on none but such as he foreseeth will believe repent and become studious of good works Like enough many doe wilfully dissemble the true state of the Question between us others ignorantly mistake it The question is not whether God decrees to bestow salvation on such as he foreseeth will believe and reject those from salvation whom he foreseeeth will not believe but of the order of reason between these decrees of God and the foresight of obedience the one side and disobedience on the other that is whether like as faith repentance and good works in men of ripe years doe precede their salvation as disposing causes thereunto so the fore-sight of faith repentance and good works precede election as disposing causes or prerequisites thereunto In like manner on the other side whether as finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So finall perseverance in sinne as foreseen by God precedes reprobation as the decree of Damnation as the meritorious cause thereof So that the argument here mentioned which is all his strength in this place rightly applyed must runne thus Faith repentance and good works actually existent precede salvation as the disposing causes thereunto therefore faith repentance and good works foreseen precede election as the disposing causes thereunto and what is this but as good as in expresse termes to professe that election is of faith repentance and good works though it be in direct contradiction unto Saint Paul professing in terminis to speak in this Divines language that the purpose of God according to election is not of works So on the other side Finall perseverance in sinne precedes damnation as the meritorious cause thereof therefore finall perseverance in sinne foreseen precedes the decree of damnation as the meritorious cause thereof And then what is to make reprobation to be of evill works if this be not Whereas Saint Paul look by what arguments he proves that election is not of good works viz. because before Jacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said of them the Elder shall serve the Younger by the same argument it is equally evident that Reprobation is not of evill works Yet we acknowledge an exact conformity between Gods decrees and the execution thereof because like as God damnes no man but for sinne so he decreed to damne no man but for sinne where sinne is in each place made the meritorious cause of damnation not of the decree of damnation And like as God bestowes salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works so he decreed to bestow salvation on no man of ripe years but by way of reward of faith repentance and good works where faith repentance and good works are in each place made the disposing causes to salvation but not to election There was never any so madde saith Aquinas as to say that merits are the cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating and Why but because so is the cause of predestination to be enquired into as the cause of Gods will is enquired into but formerly he had shewed that there can be no cause of Gods will as touching the act of God willing Now let every one judge whether the act of reprobation be not as clearly the act of Gods will as the act of predestination and consequently whether it be not equally as mad a course in Aquinas his judgement to devise a cause of reprobation as to devise a cause of predestination on the part of Gods will And no marvail for the act of Gods will is eternall all the works of the creature are temporall Then the act of Gods will is God himselfe for there is no accident in God and therefore they may as well set themselves to devise a cause of God as a cause of Gods will His phrase of casting off is ambiguous if it signifieth the denyall of salvation it followeth disobedience if it signifieth the deniall of grace it precedes disobedience in what kind soever 3. Our velle and facere are both temporall in God it is otherwise for his deeds are temporall and may admit the works of men precedaneous thereunto but his resolutions are his decrees and they are all eternall and can admit no work of man precedaneous thereunto yet is God as just in the one as in the other For like as he damnes no man but for
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
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
rather a fiction of the remnants of the Pelagians wherewithall to reproach the doctrine of S. Austin in the poynt of Predestination Thus have I examined this Authors pretence of the Novelty of our Tenent I come to the consideration of that which followes DISCOURSE The Second Motive IT S unwillingnesse to abide the Tryall I find that the Authors and Abettors of it have been very backward to bring it to the Standard not only when they have been called upon by their Adversaries to have been weighed but also when they have been intreated thereto by their chief Magistrates who might have commanded them A shrewd argument mee thinks that it is too light In the Disputation at Mompelgard Anno 1586 held between Beza and Jacobus Andreas with some Seconds on both sides Beza and his company having disputed with the Lutherans about the person of Christ the Lords Supper c. When they came to this Point did decline the sifting of it and gave this reason among others that it could not then possibly be disputed of sine gravi eorum offendiculo qui tanti mysterii capaces non sunt without the great scandall and hurt of the ignorant and unacquainted with these high mysteries The Contra-Remonstrants also in their Conference with their Adversaries at the Hague in the year 1611 could not be drawn to dispute with them about this point but delivered a Petition to the States of Holland and Westfrizland that they might not be urged to it resolving rather to break off the Conference then to meddle with it In the Synod likewise of Dort in the year 1618 and 1619. the Remonstrants were warned by the President of the Synod ut de Electione potius quà m de odiosâ Reprobations materiâ agerent that they should rather dispute of the point of Election then the odious point of Reprobation Can this Doctrine be a truth and yet blush at the light which makes all thing manifest especially considering these things 1. That Reprobation is a principall Head of Practicall divinity by the ill or well stating of which the glory of God and good of Religion is much promoted or hindered 2. That there is such a necessary connexion between the points of Election and Reprobation both being parts of predestination that the one cannot well be handled without the other 3. That Reprobation was the chief cause of all the uproares in the Church at that time 4. That it was accused with open mouth and challenged of falshood and therefore bound in justice to purge it selfe of the crimination 5. That it may easily be defended if as some say it be such an apparent truth for Nihil est ad defendendum puritate tutius nihil ad dicendum veritate facilius saith S. Hierom. The striving to lye close and hide it selfe though perhaps it be not so infallible yet it is a very probable argument of a bad cause Truth covets no corners but is willing to abide the tryall whether in men or in doctrines David knowing his heart to be without guile offers himselfe ready to the Lords tryall Search me o God and know my heart try me and know my thoughts and see if there be any wicked way in me And our Saviour tells us that Every one that doth evill hates the light and comes not to the light least his deeds should be reproved but he that doth truth comes to the light that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought in God As S. Paul saith of an Heretick he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 selfe condemned and so may we say of Heresy and untruth it condemnes it selfe and by nothing more then by refusing the Touch-stone He is to be thought an empty Scholler who is loath to be opposed and his gold to be light and counterfeit that will not have it touched and weighed and these Opinions to be but errours which would so willingly walk in a mist and dwell in silence when it concernes the peace of the Church so much to have them examined TWISSE Consideration VVHo are these Authors of this Doctrine who here are said to have been backward to bring it to the standard Is Beza those Authors whereof was he the Author Was it the doctrine of predestination as proceeding of the meer pleasure of God and not upon foresight of mans faith and works Is it not apparent that this was the doctrine of Austin 1200 years agoe and that in opposition to the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians Or was it the doctrine of reprobation as not proceeding upon the foresight of sinne but of the meer pleasure of God Is this Author so ignorant as not to know what are the conclusions of Alvarez in the question Whether there be any cause of reprobation on mans part Lib. 10. de Auxil disc 110. pag. 866. 1. His first Conclusion is this Reprobation whereby God decreed not to give unto some everlasting life and to permit their sinne is not conditionate but absolute neither doth it presuppose in God foresight of the deserts of reprobates or of their perseverance in sinne unto the last period of their life 2. His next Conclusion is In the Angells that fell there is no cause of their reprobation on their part as touching the whole effect thereof but before any foresight of their future sinne God pro sua Voluntate of his meer will did reprobate some of them and suffered them to fall into sinne 3. The third Infants departing in Originall sinne alone there is no cause on their part of reprobation if they be considered in comparison with others which are not reprobated and the like is to be said proportionably of men of ripe years 4. The fourth Not only comparatively but absolutely there is no cause of reprobation Therefore neither sinne actuall nor originall nor both of them foreseen by God was indeed the meritorious and motive cause of the reprobation of any as touching all the effects thereof and the proofe hereof he prosecutes at large 5. Reprobation as touching the last effect thereof presupposeth in signo rationis the foresight of sinne originall or actuall for which a reprobate is damned Marke it well He does not say as the cause for which God decrees his damnation but as the cause for which a reprobate is damned And Aquinas whose followers the Dominicans are expresseth this doctrine in this manner and that more Scholastically and accurately then Alvarez Praescientia peccatorum potest esse aliqua ratio reprobationis ex parte paenae quae praeparatur reprobatis in quantum scilicet Deus proponit se puniturum malos propter peccata c. in Ad Rom. 9. Sect. 2. in fine that is Prescience of sinnes may be some reason of reprobation on the part of punishment to wit in as much as God purposeth to punish wicked men for their sinnes Where sinne is evidently made the cause of damnation and that by vertue of Gods purpose but by no means the cause of the
was here passing over unto the third instance to wit of the proceedings in the Synod of Dort but upon my looking into the History thereof to prepare my selfe for an answer thereunto ere I was a ware I lighted upon the reasons of that the Contra-Remonstrants motion to be spared preferred unto the State And they utterly deny what is here cast upon them namely that they deprecated at all that they might be spared from conferring upon the poynt of reprobation But whereas the Remonstrants had incumbred the point of election and reprobation with seaven Questions which pertained not to the state of the Controversy concerning the first Article and being also imperfect and intricate for the most part and proposed to this end to draw their Adversaries away from the true state of the Question They desired to be spared from answering unto them And upon this Petition of theirs it pleased the States that leaving those thorny questions they should come to the handling of the Articles This is set down in the Preface to those Acta Synodalia set forth by the Authority of the States Fol. 10. pag. 1. For after the proposing of these two questions to the Remonstrants as touching the decree of Predestination 1. Whether the intire decree of Predestination were contained in this Article namely That God did from everlasting decree to save believers which no man denies 2. Whether they thought faith perseverance therein did precede election as the Causes or Conditions thereof After the Remonstrants had answered affirmatively unto them both hereupon they bring in their seaven for the most part intricate questions Reponebant deinde septem alias tum de electione tum de reprobatione questiones ad quas a Pastoribus à Classibus deputatis responderi volebant Quae cum ad controversiae de primo articulo statum non spectarent etiam mutilae atque intricatae pleraeque essent eumque in finem ab illis proponerentur ut hoc modo a praecipuo controversiae statu rectaque agendi ratione in ambages ad ducerent Pastores expositâ per Libellum supplicem Illust Ordd. iniquâ hâc agendi ratione non quidem deprecati sunt ne de reprobatione sententiam suam manifestarent uti Remonstrantes improbè saepius ipsis objectarunt sed disertè sententiam suam quantum ad Ecclesiarum pacem atque aedificationem sufficere existimarent non tantum vivâ voce sed scripto declararunt Se nimirum cum aeternum electionis singularium personarum decretum ponunt simul quoque ponere aeternum de reprobatione rejectione quarundam singularium personarum decretum quum fieri nequeat ut sit electio quin simul quòque sit aliqua reprobatio aut derelictio Difficiles omnes circa hunc articulum quaestiones temere excutere nihil aliud esse quam inutilibus disputationibus nihil profuturis litibus Ecclesiam replere ejusque pacem perturbare Declarationem suam hanc Libello supplice expressam moderatis omnibus paceâ—que amantibus ingeniis sufficere debere Credi videlicet ac doceri ab ipsis Deum neminem condemnare imò verò ne statuisse quidem condemnare quenquam nisi justè propter propria ipsius peccata Placuit itaque Illust Ordd. ut missis illis spinosis quaestionibus ad articulorum pertractationem deveniretur And Pag. 136. 156. I find this objection proposed by the Remonstrants in these words Pag. 156. In Collatione Haghiensi Libello supplice Illust Hollandiae Westfriziae Ordinibus exhibito deprecati sunt Contra-Remonstrantes ne de reprobatione ageretur more at large Pag. 195. Thus Ipsi Contra-Remonstrantes cum in Colloquio Haghiensi jussi essent ad interrogata quaedam nostra de reprobatione respondere Magistratui morem gerere gravati fuerint usque adeò ut Collationem caeptam abrumpere se malle profiterentur quà m ut summarum Potestatum imperio se constringi paterentur nihil aliud conscientiae suae praetexentes quam quod Ecclesiae aedificationi obfuturam eam agendi rationem judicarent Now to this Pag. 157. Festus Hominus one present in that Conference stands up and answers Exposuitque paucis quà m non bonâ fide haec de illis dicerentur Se Libello supplice non fuisse deprecatos ne de reprobatione ageretur caeterùm quia Remonstrantes subdolè in ipso Collationis initio septem questionibus spinosis ac minime necessariis non tantum ad reprobationis sed electionis quoque doctrinam spectantibus à recto agendi ordine Contra-Remonstrantes in ambages adducere conarentur Contra-Remonstrantes Libello supplice apud Illust-Ordd de tam iniquâ agendi ratione conquestos fuisse atque ut Remonstrantibus mandaretur ne extra justam agendi rationem jam inchoatam evagarentur petiisse De reprobatione autem Contra-Remonstrantes quantum ad aedificationem satis erat sententiam suam clarè ibidem explicasse uti scriptorum editorum fide probari potest Idem etiam Reverendus Doctissimus vir D. Joannes Becius qui ipse huic interfuerat Collationi suo praesens comprobabat testimonio Now I come to the Synod of Dort 4. This Author saith the Remonstronts were there warned by the President of the Synod Ut de electione potius quà m de odiosâ reprobationis materiâtagerent And truly at first I wondered not a little that the President of that Synod should account the matter of reprobation which is as much as to say the doctrine of reprobation an odious matter an odious doctrine For we commonly signify hereby such a doctrine as deserves to be hated but I thought withall that they might expresse rather what is the condition of it in the event namely that it is entertained with hatred not of all neither nor of any of those that submit their judgements to the word of God but rather of those and of those only who follow the judgement of flesh and bloud Yet I thought good to enquire into the truth of the fact here mentioned and I find it in the page mentioned and how the Remonstrants themselves doe expresse this even as here it is expressed thus A Reverendo Praeside moniti sumus ut à negativis enunciationibus abstineremus de electione potius quà m odiosâ reprobationis materiâ ageremus Yet I confesse this did not satisfy me For why should this Author make choyce to expresse it in the Remonstrants termes rather then in the words of the President himselfe Therefore I turne to the beginning of that Session being Sess 32. There I find this particular Submonuit Praeses ut potius quaestionibus illis inhaererent quae circa suavem de electione doctrinam versarentur quà m ut dâ— odiosè doctrinam de reprobatione exagitarent Now I find a great deale of difference between professing the matter of reprobation or the doctrine hereof to be odious and admonishing to spare the exagitation thereof after an odious manner This indeed being their usuall course to make it as odious as they
the Gospell according to that Mar. 1. Repent ye and believe the Gospell Now to believe the Gospell is one thing the summe whereof is this That Jesus Christ came into the World to save sinners but to believe in Christ is another thing which yet this Author distinguisheth not though it appears by the course of his argumentation that he draws to this meaning and that in a particular sense which is this to believe that Christ died for them as appears expressely in the latter end of this Section And no marvaile if this Author carry himselfe so confidently in this being as he is armed with such confidence But I am glad that in one place or other he springs his meaning that we may have the fairer flight at him to pull down his pride and sweep away his vain considence though we deale upon the most plausible argument of the Arminians and which they think insoluble My answer is first Look in what sense Arminius saith Christ died for us in the same sense we may be held to say without prejudice to our Tenet of absolute reprobation that all who heare the Gospell are bound to believe that Christ died for them For the meaning that Arminius makes of Christs dying for us is this Christ dyed for this end that satisfaction being made for sinne the Lord now may pardon sinne upon what condition he will which indeed is to dye for obtaining a possibility of the redemption of all but for the actuall redemption of none at all Secondly But I list not to content my selfe with this therefore I farther answer by distinction of the phrase of dying for us that we may not cheat our selves by the confounding of things that differ To dye for us or for all is to dye for our benefit or for the benefit of all Now these benefits are of a different nature whereof some are bestowed upon man only conditionally though for Christs sake and they are the pardon of sinne and Salvation of the Soule and these God doth conferre only upon the condition of faith and repentance Now I am ready to professe and that I suppose as out of the mouth of all our Divines that every one who hears the Gospell without distinction between Elect and Reprobate is bound to believe that Christ died for him so farre as to procure both the pardon of his sinnes and the salvation of his soule in case he believe and repent But there are other benefits which Christ by his obedience hath merited for us namely the benefit of faith and repentance For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulnesse dwell Col. 1. And He hath blessed us with all spirituall blessings in Christ that is for Christs sake and God works in us that which is pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ and therefore seeing nothing is more pleasing in Gods sight on our part then faith and repentance even these also I should think God works in us through Jesus Christ and the Apostle praies in the behalfe of the Ephesians for peace and faith and love from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ that is as I interpret it from God the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost as an efficient cause and from the Lord Jesus Christ God and Man as a meritorious cause thereof Now I demand whether this Author can say truly that t is the constant opinion of our Divines that all who heare the Gospell whether Elect or Reprobate are bound to believe that Christ dyed to procure them faith and repentance Nay doth any Arminian at this day believe this or can he name any Arminian that doth avouch this Nay doth himselfe believe this If he doth not if he cannot shew any Arminian that doth with what face can he charge this opinion upon us as if we should extend the obligation to believe much farther then the Arminians doe whereas usually they criminate us for not extending it so farre as we should And indeed there is a main difference between these benefits and the former For as touching the former namely pardon of sinne and salvation God doth not use to conferre them but conditionally to wit upon the condition of faith and repentance But as for faith and repentance doth God conferre them conditionally also If so then let them make known to us what that condition is on mans part and whatsoever it be let them look unto it how they can avoid the making of grace to wit the grace of faith and repentance to be given according unto works But if these graces are conferred absolutely and Christ dyed for all to this end that faith and repentance should be conferred absolutely upon all then it followeth manifestly herehence that all must believe and repent and consequently all must be saved So that not only Election as Huberus that renegate faigned must be universall but Salvation also Thus have I given in my answer distinctly to that which he delivered most confusedly Fourthly I come to the scanning of the particular opinion of Zanchy namely that every one that hears the Gospell whether elect or reprobate for so I suppose it proceeds to wit only of them who heare the Gospell though this Author takes no consideration of that neither but hand-over-head laies about him like a mad man is bound to believe that he is elect in Christ and will trye whether I cannot reduce that opinion of his also to a faire interpretation And here first I observe Zanchy is not charged to maintain that every hearer of the Gospell is bound to believe that he is elect in Christ unto faith and repentance but only to salvation that puts me in good heart that Zanchy I shall shake hands of fellowship in the end and part good friends Secondly I distinguish between absolute-absolute-Election unto Salvation and election unto Salvation-absolute The first only removes all cause on mans part of election the latter removes all cause on mans part of salvation By cause of salvation I mean only a disposing cause such as faith repentance and good works are as whereby to expresse it in the Apostles phrase we are made meet partakers of the inheritance of the Saints of light Now albeit Zanchy maintains as we doe that all the elect are absolutely elected unto salvation there being no cause on mans part of his election as we have learned yet neither Zanchy nor we doe maintain that God doth elect any unto salvation absolute that is to bring him to salvation without any disposing of him thereunto by faith and repentance Now to accommodate that opinion of Zanchy I say it may have a good sense to say that every hearer is bound to believe both that Christ dyed to procure Salvation for him in case he doe believe and that God ordained that he should be saved in case he doe believe where beliefe is made the condition only of salvation not of the Divine ordination and the confusion of these by the Arminians doth usually
but to draw them up by these to an expectation of better things and a carefull endeavour to please God that they might obtain them But what blessings had the Gentiles more than common blessings doth he particulate any And as for the expectation of better things than the things of this world whereunto he pretends God doth draw them hereby what oracle hath he for this Prosper in the Book wherein he insists hath nothing at all of any possibility of knowledge of God unto salvation arriveable unto by the meere contemplation of the creature neither have I found any such Oracle throughout the Nation of the Arminians Nay he professeth plainly that that knowledge of God which is attaineable by the contemplation of the creature is not sufficient unlesse he enjoy the true light to discusse the darknesse of mans heart De vocatione Gent. l. 2. cap. 6. his words are these Tam acerbo natura humana vulnere sauciata est ut ad cognitionem Dei neminem contemplatio spontanea plenè valeat erudire nisi obumbrationem cordis vera lux discusserit And the Apostle more than once professeth of the Gentiles that they were without hope And the tast of the powers of the world to come seemes to be by the Apostle ascribed to the word of God as the cause of it Heb. 6. Yet 't is true the Heathen had odde notions of a condition after death as many as believed the immortality of the soule but where I pray was it upwards in heaven or downewards rather under the earth as Styx Phlegeton and the Campi Elisii yet Cicero looks upwards I confesse in his Tusculans questions but yet he goes no farther than the starres and this was their expectation of better things though Adrian an Emperour and a Schollar too bemoans himselfe that he knew not what should become of his poore soule Animula vagula blandula Hospes comesque corporis Quae tu abibis in loca nec ut soles dabis jocos horridula rigida nudula But this Author most confidently supposeth that these better things are manifest by the creatures by the contemplation whereof he might attaine to the knowledge of them and then I doubt not but he might entertaine a hope to attaine them provided he carefully endeavoured to please God which this Author conceaves to have been very possible and therewithall knew what that was by doing whereof he might be sure to please God And all this he obtrudes upon his Reader by a most dissolute course without one crumme of reason for it In like sort he discourseth very confidently of the end of man without distinction of any relation hereof as if the end of man were equally known as well by light of nature as by revelation of Gods word Solomon telleth us That God made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill Was this known to the Gentiles by the light of nature Not one of all the Philosophers of old acknowledged the Worlds creation out of nothing and who ever manifested any such faith among them as of enjoying a perpetuall society with God in heaven But it may be they all erred in interpreting the book of nature aright and understanding the language thereof concerning this poynt of faith This Author may doe well to cleare the World of this errour and that out of the book of the creatures and then proceed to interpret unto us therehence a generall resurrection also And if he could find Christ there too togeather with the Incarnation of the Sonne of God and his death and passion resurrection and ascension and sitting at the right hand of God to make request for us and our justification by faith in him togeather with regeneration also and the generall judgement then no doubt though the Gospell should continue to be a scandall to the Jewes yet surely through the incomprehensible benefit of his comfortable atchievements it should continue no longer to be foolishnesse unto the Gentiles only our faith should then cease and be turned into sight before we are brought to the seeing of the face of God And yet I see no great need of Christ if it be in the power of an Heathen man to know what it is to please God and to have an heart to please him For certainly as many as know what it is to please God and have an heart to please him God will never hurt them much lesse damne them to hell Yet the Apostle telleth us that they that are in the flesh cannot please God but whether this Author thinks Heathens to be amongst the number of them that are in the flesh I know not But I little wonder when an Arminian spirit of giddinesse hath possessed him if he proceed to the confounding not only of the Law with the Gospell but heathenisme also such as might be with Christianity But suppose a man might attaine to as much knowledge by the meere contemplation of the book of nature as we doe obtain by the Revelation of Gods word yet we that conceive the knowledge of Gods word to be no impediment to the absolutenesse of reprobation must needs find our selves as much as nothing streightned herein by this Authors roaving discourse as touching the generall providence of God in his works as long as that of the Apostle he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth shall stand and be received for the word of God we shall never want ground for maintaining the absolutenesse both of election by the one and by just proportion of Reprobation also by the other For so long as God doth absolutely and according to the meere pleasure of his will decree to have mercy upon some by giving them faith and repentance for the curing of their infidelity and hardnesse of heart this is very sufficient to maintain the absolutenesse of election unto grace and if God doth absolutely and according to the meere pleasure of his will decree to harden others by denying them the grace of faith and repentance so to leave their naturall infidelity and hardnesse of heart uncured this shall be as sufficient to maintaine the absolutenesse of Reprobation from grace As for election unto salvation though the decree thereof can admit no cause yet we say that God by this decree doth not decree to bestow salvation on any man of ripe yeares but by way of reward of faith repentance and good workes as for the decree of Reprobation from glory and to damnation though the decree hath no cause yet we say that God by this decree doth not decree to inflict damnation on any but for sinne unrepented of only I confesse that as touching the interpretation of those words of Saint Paul He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth I doe not know how it may be charmed by good witts least it may seem repugnant to some reason gathered by contemplation of the creatures for some affect such a
of our Children to love the Lord our God with all our hearts to take the stony heart out of our bowells and give us an heart of flesh and to put his own spirit within us as he seeth our waies so to heale them yea to heale our back-slidings to heale our rebellions All this this sweet comforter takes no notice of contenting himselfe with such a grace to be merited for him by Christ as this if he will believe he shall believe if he will repent he shall repent if he will love God with all his heart he shall love him with all his heart Yet when a man doth believe they are able to give him no assurance of his salvation or of his election because they maintaine that a man may totally and finally fall away from grace And all because their doctrine is that Gods effectuall grace in working the act of faith and repentance is given meerely according to mens works Tempted God purposed that his Sonne should dye for all men and that in his name an offer of remission of sinnes and salvation should be made to every one but yet upon this condition that they will doe that which he meanes the greatest part shall never doe i. e. Repent and believe nor I among the rest CONSIDERATION How doth God meane that the greatest part of men shall never believe and repent by our opinion Is it in this sence that they shall not believe and repent if they will When was it ever knowne that any of our Divines ever wrote or taught this We think rather it is impossible it should be otherwise therefore say it is a very absurd thing to call this Grace as the Arminians doe Indeed we say that God doth not meane by his preventing grace to work the wills of the greatest part of men to believe repent Doe not the Arminians say so too Yes verily and a great deale more for they deny that he workes any mans will to believe and repent in this manner but we say God purchaseth thus to worke the wills of all his chosen ones and when he hath wrought them to keepe them by his power through faith unto Salvation and put his feare in their hearts that they shall never depart a way from him Jer 32. 40. And upon this ground we can assure believers of their election which Arminians cannot And them that believe not keepe from dispaire in better manner then the Arminians can for they leave them to themselves to believe whereas the Scriptures shew that to be impossible so that they take upon them to comfort such quite against the haire But we comfort them with a possibility of being converted unto God by representing his allmighty power whose voyce is able to pierce into the graves and make dead Lazarus heare it This power he shewed in converting Saul when he marched furiously Jehu like against the Church of God Therfore be thou of good comfort especially considering thou art as it were under the wings of God thou hearest his voyce many come out of their graves at his call some at one time some at another and so maist thou God knowes how soone then shalt thou be assured of thine election which by Arminianisme thou canst not be in the meane time thou hast no cause to conclude that thou art a Reprobate Minister God hath a true meaning that all men who are called should repent and believe that so they might be saved as he would have all to be saved so to come to the knowledge of the truth and as he would have no man to perish so he would have all men to repent and therefore he calls them in the Preaching of the word to the one as well as to the other CONSIDERATION He keepes his course to afford thee the best comfort his doctrine yeelds which is as much as is incident to a Reprobate and how that should make thee conceive better of thy selfe then as of a Reprobate I doe not perceive Gods meaning is that as many as heare the Gospell should believe and repent ex officio that is that it shall be their duty for he commands it but he hath no meaning to bestow on all and every one the grace of faith and repentance as appeares by experience And if God did will they should de facto believe and be saved then either God is not able to bring them to faith and to save them or else his will is changed In like sort if it were his will that all and every one should know his truth then God is not able to make all and every one know his truth for it is apparent that all doe not it is apparent that all have not the Gospell The Apostle saith That God will not have any of us to perish but all to come to repentance he doth not say he would but he will And this is true of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as the Apostle speakes of believers and elect But as for others the Scriptures plainly professe that God blinds them hardens them and of Israell in the wildernesse The Lord saith Moses hath not given you an heart to perceive nor eyes to see nor eares to heare unto this day Deut 29. 4. He calls all that heare the Gospell indifferently by the Ministry of the Word but he openeth not the heart of all to attend unto it as to the Word of God like as we read he opened the heart of â—idia Acts. 16. 14. Tempted God hath a double call outward by his word inward by the irresistible work of his spirit with this he doth not call every man to believe but a very few only whom he hath infallibly and inevitably ordained to eternall life and therefore by the outward call which I enjoy among many others I cannot be assured of Gods good will and meaning that I shall believe repent and be saved CONSIDERATION Our Doctrine teacheth not that God calls every one by his Word that is an Arminian interjection But the outward call belongs to many more then are chosen as our Saviour sayth many are called but few are chosen Indeed he gives faith and repentance to a very few which no Arminian denyes only the Question is Whether God gives faith and repentance to whom he will or according to mens works We saytis to whom he will proceeding herein according to the meere pleasure of his will and not according to mens workes which to affirme is manifest Pelagianisme and publikely condemned many hundred yeares agoe It is true if thou dost not believe Gods Word doth not assure thee that he will make thee believe that were to assure thee of thine election before thy vocation a most unreasonable thing to be expected But God by his word assures thee that t is his meaning that without faith thou shalt not be saved Yet there is no cause thou shouldest think thy selfe a Reprobate for this was the condition of every one of Gods elect before their calling
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
Synod of Palestine 1200. yeares agoe to this day The difference of opinions here feigned by him about the point of Reprobation amongst our Divines is like the feigning of a knot in a bulrush For what is a peremptory denying of grace and glory to some men lying in the fall other then a denyall of that grace and glory which is prepared in the decree of election to the sonnes of God though indeed neither of them make it a denyall which is done in time but rather Gods decree to deny it For do not the latter Divines maintaine it to be peremptory as well as the former For what difference doth he devise between a flat denyall and a peremptory denyall and as for the latter decree belonging to reprobation here mentioned namely a preordination of the man thus left to the torments of hell do not the latter Divines acknowledge this decree to belong to Reprobation also Only they professe that God preordaines none to eternall torments in hell but for their sinnes actuall as well as originall of as many as live to ripenesse of age Now I would faine know what Divine of ours maintaines the contrary 1. Our Divines in saying Reprobation is Decretum quo statuit non misereri do manifest that not denying grace but the decree of denying it is Reprobation Walaeus speaketh of no common endowments though that be a truth which here is attributed unto them else how should they be called common endowments 2. If he decrees to leave Reprobates without grace and consequently under that necessity of sinning into which all are cast by the sinne of Adam it is nothing strange I thinke that God should accordingly leave them therein though in a different manner the Lord prostituting some to their own lost's and to the power of Satan more then others and making some even by the ministery of the Gospell proficere ad exteriorem vitae emendationem quo mitius puniantur as Austin some where speaketh If Gods decree cannot be frustrated as here is avouched I wonder he should charge us with teaching that God decreeth this or that immutably For if he should change any of his decrees they should undoubtedly be frustrated Indeed we do not say that God decrees Hypothetically to give grace to wit upon condition that men will make themselves fit for it and for failing herein to deny them grace And I am very glad to observe so good correspondence in the suffrages of Protestant Divines in the Synod of Dort and our English also with them Sect 3. 3. God both decreeth and executeth this leaving of men to themselves of his alone absolute will and pleasure This is the third branch 1 That they say so witnesse the suffrage of our English Divines We affirme that this non election is founded in the most free pleasure of God And that no man lying in the fall is past over by the meere will of God is numbred by the same Divines among the heterodox positions To this purpose also speake The Palatinate Ministers The cause of Reprobation is the most free and just will of God That God passeth over some and denyeth them the grace of the Gospell the cause is the same free pleasure of God Thus the Divines of Hessen God decreed to leave some in the fall of his own good pleasure The proofe of this they fetch from the execution of this decree in time God doth in time leave some of mankind fallen and doth not bestow upon them meanes necessary to beleive c. and this out of his most free pleasure This they joyntly affirme and prove it by this reason especially All men were lookt on as sinners If sinne therefore were the cause that moved God to reprobate he should have reprobated or rejected all But he did not Reprobate all therefore for sinne he reprobated none but for his owne pleasure in which we must rest wthout seeking any other cause 1. Now from these two things layd together viz. 1. That God did bring men into a necessity of sinning 2. That he hath left the Reprobates under this necessity it will follow that he is the Authour of the reprobates sinnes 1. Because Causae causae est causa causati the Cause of a cause is the cause of its effect if there be a necessary subordination betweene the causes and the effect whether it be a cause by acts negative or positive But God is the cheife or sole cause by their doctrine of that which is the necessary and immediate cause of the sinnes of reprobates namely their impotency and want of supernaturall grace therefore he is by the same doctrine the true and proper cause of their sinnes 2. Because Removens prohibens that which withdraweth and withholdeth a thing which being present would hinder an event is the cause of that event As for example he that cutteth a string in which a stone hangs is the cause of the falling of that stone And he that withdraweth a pillar which being put to uphold a house is the true cause in mens account of the falling of that house But God by their opinion withholdeth from reprobates that power which being granted them might keep thē from falling into sinne therefore he becometh a true morall cause of their sinnes In whose power it is that a thing be not done to him it is imputed when it is done sayth Tertullian In cuius manu est quid ne fiat ei deputatur cum iam fit It will not suffice to say that God by withholding grace from reprobates becometh only an accidentall not a proper and direct cause of their sinnes For a cause is then only accidentall in relation to the effect when the effect is beside the intention and expectation of the cause For example Digging in a feild is then an accidentall cause of the finding a bag of gold when that event is neither expected not intended by the husbandman in digging But when the event is lookt for and aymed at then the cause though it be the cause only by withholding the impediment is not accidentall As a Pilot who withholdeth his care and skill from a ship in a storme foreseeing that by his neglect the ship will be drowned is not to be reputed an accidentall but a direct and proper cause of the losse of this ship This being so it followeth that God by this act and decree of removing and detaining grace necessary to the avoyding of sinne from reprobates not as one ignorant and carelesse what will or shall follow but knowing infallibly what mischeife will follow and determining precisely that which doth follow viz their impenitency and damnation becomes the proper and direct cause of their sinnes That God of his meere pleasure sheweth mercy on some and hardeneth others is the expresse word of God Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Now to shew mercy is to give the grace of faith and obedience as appeares
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
can like as Arminius Doctrinam de praedestinatione odiosam reddere conabatur as it is professed in the Preface to those Act. Synod fol. 7. pag. 2. and fol. 8. pag. 2. They professe in like manner of the Remonstrants namely that in their Remonstrance they endeavoured Illust Ordd. odiosam reddere doctrinam Ecclesiarum Reformatarum and that not only de divinâ predestinatione but also de Gratiâ Dei Sanctorum Perseverantiâ but all this malâ fide nec sine apertis atrocibusque calumniis Moreover I find Sess 39. pag. 151. this decree of the Synode gratifying the Remonstrants and yeelding to their motion made which was that they might have liberty to treat as well of reprobation as of election thus Quoniam Remonstrantes aliquoties professi sunt se per conscientiam in Synodo subsistere ulterius non posse nisi prius caveatur ipsis fore ut de electione reprobatione eâ ratione quam in Thesibus Scriptis suis hactenus exhibitis proposuerunt in posterùm agatur Synodus quò magis ipsis fiat satis publice ac corà m omnibus declarat statuisse sese ac statuere sententiam ipsorum non de electione modò verum etiam de reprobatione expendere atque examinare Quantum nempe in conscientiâ ad Dei gloriam aedificationem tranquillitatem Ecclesiae omniumque conscientiarum posse ac debere satis esse ipsa judicaret Ad agendi verò modum qui hic est servandus ordinem quod attinet suum esse de eo dispicere non autem fratrum Remonstrantium qui huc sunt citati quicquam praescribere existimat This decree being read to the Remonstrants they refused to give way unto it The 40 Session contains the altercation thereabout between the Synod and them They forsooth would prescribe to the Synod de modo Agendi the Synod must not prescribe to them And they professe against it Sess 41. pag. 155. in this manner Nec satisfit nobis si dicatur Synodum permissuram ut nostram de reprobatione sententiam tractemus quoad illa ipsa ad gloriam Dei aedificationem Ecclesiarum conscientiarum tranquillitatem fore judicabit Nam hâc ipsâ restrictione nobis praeciditur libertas plenaria sententiae nostrae defensio contrariae Impugnatio Praeterquam quòd non levis suspicandi nobis data sit occasio Synodum ubi nos de electione disserentes audiverit nequaquam permissuram ut Contra-Remonstrantium eorum quos illi pro Orthodoxis habent de reprobatione sententiam prout necessarium judicabimus ad incudem revocari Hereupon the Synod entreats the judgement of Forraine Divines and they all with one consent professe Tantam Remonstrantibus libertatem ad defensionem causae suae concessam esse quantâ ex ratione dignitate Synodi Citatis concedi posset Ac proinde nullam esse causam cur Synodicum decretum mutandum videretur aut cur Remonstrantes querelam instituerent vel authoritatem hujus Synodi subterfugerent Nihil illis esse imperatum quod ullo modo conscientias ipsorum gravare posset Ac proinde conscientiae velum frustra pervicaciae obtendi Abundè iis omnibusque modis satisfactum jam esse Absolutam illam nullisque circumscriptam limitibus libertatem quam petunt à Synodo concedi ipsis non posse Aequum esse ut certis sese legibus submittant quibus si exorbitent coërceantur Nay in the next Session which is Sess 42. there is a representation made of their unreasonable demand in these words Professi sunt sibi agendi modum a Synodo praescriptum iniquum videri Sibi permitti velle non tantum primo loco sed circa omnes articulos Theses singulaque argumenta de sententiâ Contra-Remonstrantium corum quos illi pro Orthodoxis habent quoad reprobationem agere quia in hoc argumento calceus illos maximè urgeat Hereupon the Opinions of the forraigne Divines were required to wit Whether it were fit to yeeld unto them as to treat of Reprobation before they treated of Election Qui consentientibus declarabant suffragiis ab omni ratione methodo esse alienum id quod Remonstrantes peterent ut prius de reprobatione quà m de electione agere sibi liceret Their judgements hereupon are here represented severally and at large First of our Brittish Divines then of the Palatine Divines then of the Divines of the Land of Hesse then of the Helvetians then of those who were of the correspondency of Weteraw then of those of Geneva then of those of Breme and lastly of those of Emden 5. Upon the former bald and base pretences as if Conclusum esset contrà Manichaeos the Author proceeds crowing magnificentissimè and demanding in this manner Can this doctrine be a truth and yet blush at the light which makes all things manifest especially considering these things 1. That Reprobation is a principall Head of practicall Divinity by the well or ill stating or ordering of which the glory of God and good of Religion is much promoted or hindered 2. That there is such a necessary connexion between the points of election and reprobation both being parts of predestination that the one cannot be well handled without the other 3. That Reprobation was the chiefe cause of all the uproares in the Churches of that time 4. That it was accused with open mouth and challenged of falshood and therefore bound in justice to purge it selfe of the crimination 5. That it may easily be defended if as some say it be such an apparent truth For Nihil est ad defendendum puritate facilius saith S t Hierome Now albeit for the discovery of the vile vanity of this conclusion I need take no other pains then to appeal to your or any sober mans due consideration of the premises duely examined according to my former answer yet I think good not to passe it over without such particular consideration as it deserves First I pray consider what is that light that makes all things manifest Is it the light of Conference In the Conference of Mompelgard there were diverse other things disputed of besides this of predestination Now is the truth manifested hereby in all those particulars If it be I pray let him signify on whose side whether on the part of Jacobus Andreas or on the part of Beza To whom is it made manifest To either side or only to that side on whose side this Author conceives the truth to stand Doe you not manifestly perceive the crudity of this conceit Nay who seeth not that it is not the condition of conference but the quality rather and ability of the conferrers that is apt to manifest the truth And such men are able to manifest as well out of conference in their discourses either Positive or Controversiall as in conference yea and farre better Those discourses being more quietly carried and more free from altercation then conferences especially in case they meet with malignant
manner to command Abraham to sacrifice his sonne but it was not Gods determination that Isaack should be sacrificed In like sort he commanded Pharaoh to let Israel goe but withall he told Moses he would harden Pharaohs heart that he should not let them goe for a long time 2. But in the accommodation of these distinctions unto thy selfe What ground hast thou to affirme that God willeth not thy salvation in particular If thou believest Gods word assureth thee thou shalt be saved if thou believest not yet thou maist believe and Gods word hath power to bring thee unto faith as formerly I have discoursed And as for the best of Gods Children who doe believe to the great comfort of their soules rejoycing with joy unspeakable and glorious 1 Pet. 1. They were sometimes in as uncomfortable a condition as thou now art And the rather I put thee upon this because I see he that takes upon him to comfort thee doth take a course rather to feed thy humour then to remove it in as much as he never enquires into the cause thereof For albeit he gave to understand he would apply his argument with as much art and cunning as could be yet it may be that was rather with respect to the advantage of his own cause then to thy consolation But let us see whether he mends it in the next Minister Christ came into the World to seeke and to save what was lost and is a propitiation not for our sinnes only i. e. the sinnes of a few particular men or the sinnes of all sorts of men but for the sinnes of the whole World therefore he came to save thee for thou wast lost and to be a propitiation for thy sinnes for thou art part of the whole World CONSIDERATION Still he continues to afford thee as much comfort as any Reprobate in the world and if thou desirest no more thou maist rest satisfied with this but withall I confesse he affords thee as much comfort as he can afford any of Gods elect for he maketh elect and Reprobate all alike in receiving comfort from Gods Word Christ came into the world to save that which was lost but unlesse he came to save all that is lost it will not follow that he came to save thee We know that pardon of sinne and salvation is procured by Christ for none but such as believe and therefore be not deceived without faith looke for neither by faith be assured of both and that thou art one of Gods elect and no Reprobate And observe well he tells thee nothing of Christ meriting faith and repentance this now a dayes is plainly denyed by the Remonstrants and this Authour is content to say nothing of it when he is put to it we know what must be the issue of it if he sayeth Christ hath merited faith and repentance for thee the meaning is but this Christ hath merited that if thou wilt believe thou shalt believe if thou wilt repent thou shalt repent And that Christ hath merited that God should bestow faith and repentance not on whom he will according to the meere pleasure of his will but according to mens workes The comfort that our doctrine ministers unto thee is this If thou dost believe in Christ thou maist be assured thou art an elect of God if thou dost not believe there is no cause why thou shouldest thinke thy selfe a Cast-away for albeit thou hast not faith to day yet thou maist have faith to morrow Give thy selfe to Gods Word and waite upon him in his ordinances thou maist be so wrought upon as that unbeliever was 1 Cor 14. Who is there represented falling downe on his face and confessing that God was in the Preacher of a truth And though at first thou attendest to it but in a carnall manner yet God may open thy heart as he opened the heart of Lidia and make thee attend unto it in a gracious manner Tempted The World as I have heard is taken two waies in Scripture Largely for all mankind and strictly for the elect or believers In this latter sense Christ dyed for the World Or if for all yet it was only dignitate pretii not voluntate propositi thus only for a few selected ones with whom it is not my lot to be numbred CONSIDERATION Suffer not thy selfe to be abused by them who pretending thy comfort yet seeke nothing lesse but only the promoting of their owne cause And observe how he takes notice of no other benefits of Christs death then such as belong unto men upon the condition of faith to wit pardon of sinne and Salvation in which case the mention of Gods elect comes in very unseasonably And thus is the love of God set forth unto us so God loved the world that he gave his only begotten Sonne that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life And if it be not thy lot to be numbred amongst believers then we can give thee by Gods Word no assurance of thy Salvation But if thou art not a believer yet thou maist be in good time as formerly I have spoken more at large and therefore no reason to think thou art a Reprobate And if once thou dost believe in Christ our doctrine gives thee assurance of Justification Salvation and Election the Arminan doctrine doth not As for faith and repentance we say Christ hath merited them also but to be bestowed how According to mens workes say our Arminians though forraine Arminians professe plainly that Christ merited not faith and regeneration for any And if thou relishest this comfort be satisfied with it we say faith and repentance are bestowed absolutely according to the meere pleasure of Gods will and accordingly Christ merited them but not for all for then all should believe and repent and be saved but only for some and who can these be but Gods elect whence it followeth clearly that whosoever believes may by our doctrine be assured of his election not so by the doctrine of Arminians but if thou believest not thou art in no worse case then the best of Gods childern have been for there was a time when they believed not therefore thou hast no more cause to think thy selfe a cast-away then they had Minister God hath founded an universall Covenant with men upon the bloud of Christ and therefore he intended it should be shed for all men universally he hath made a promise of salvation to every one that will believe and excludes none that will not believe CONSIDERATION This I confesse is to administer as much comfort as is administred to any Reprobate but how can this qualify thy discomfort and discontent which riseth from this conceit that thou art a Reprobate And the truth is that by our Doctrine wee were all in a miserable case if Gods Covenant of grace extended no farther then this But hath not God promised to be our Lord and our God that sanctifyeth us to circumcise our hearts and the hearts
them to be a good man or to have the grace of faith repentance or any other truly planted in his heart Which being so I say that the Minister cannot by the eternall acts and fruits of faith and repentance which he seeth come from him make it evident to the tempted for the silencing of all replies that he is without doubt a true believer and a true repentant and consequently no reprobate For still the tempted may say You may be deceived in me for you can see not a whit more in me then hath been seen in many a Reprobate If this be all you can say to prove me to be none I am not satisfied I may be a Reprobate nay I am a Reprobate and you are but a miserable comforter a Physitian of no value This that I say Piseator doth ingeniously confesse where he saith that no comfort can possibly be instilled into the soules of Reprobates afflicted with this temptation Whence it followes that the greatest part of men must beare their burthen if they fall into this trouble as wel as they can the Gospell cannot afford them any sound comfort 2. That the elect in this case may be comforted but it must be this way viz. by their feeling of the burthen of sinne and their desire to be freed from it by Christ which proofs as I have said are but only probable not infallible arguments of a mans election and therefore unsufficient comforts And in the end of the same Thesis where he saith That a man should reason thus with himselfe Grace is offered to some with a mind of communicating it to them therefore it may be that I am in that number he implyes that the doctrine of absolute Reprobation which teacheth this communication of grace to some few only affords but a fieri potest a peradventure I am elected for a poore soule to comfort himselfe withall TWISSE Consideration IN the last place we are to consider how truly he affirmeth that our doctrine leaveth a Minister none but weake grounds and those insufficient to quiet the tempted And whereas he saith We cannot conceive and make it evident to the understanding of the tempted that he is not that which he feares a Reprobate we willingly acknowledge it For not to be a reprobate is to be an elect Now how can any Arminian convince and make it evident to the understanding I doe not say of the tempted but of one that is a believer and walkes on comfortablely in the wayes of Godlinesse is he I say able to convince such a one and make it evident unto him that he is one of Gods elect I doe not think they dare professe that they presume they can or make it evident to their owne understanding that themselves are of the number of Gods elect How unreasonable then is this course to require of us to convince a man that acknowledgeth neither faith nor repentance in him for this is the condition of a man tempted as himselfe fashioneth it and to make it evident to his understanding that he is an elect and no reprobate when himselfe cannot convict him that believeth of this no nor their owne consciences neither notwithstanding all their confidence that they alone are in the right way of salvation Was there ever heard a more unreasonable course then this Againe to feare to be a reprobate or least he be a Reprobate is one thing to perswade himselfe that he is a Reprobate and to despaire thereupon is another thing We say and that according to our Doctrine that there is no cause why any man who hath not sinned the sinne unto death the sinne against the Holy Ghost should perswade himselfe that he is a Reprobate and despaire thereupon we doe not say there is no cause of feare In as much as he hath no evidence of his election there is just cause to feare but then againe seeing he neither hath nor can have any evidence of his reprobation excepting the guilt of the sinne against the Holy Ghost he hath every way as good cause to hope And for the comforting of such a one I would make bold to tell him that there is more hope of such a one as himselfe then of those who goe on in the wayes of their owne heart and in the light of their owne eyes without all remorse and check of conscience without feare or wit not considering that for all these things God will bring them to judgment And towards such I would think it fit to use all meanes and motives to make them feare The Apostle seemes to me to take the like course with better men then such even with such as went on in a faire and comfortable profession of Gospell namely to make them feare and suspect themselves as when he saith Prove youre selves whether you are in the faith examine your selves Know ye not that Christ is in you except ye be Reprobates 2 Cor. 13. 5. And for good reason for as Paul was jealous over the Corinthians with a Godly jealousy for feare least as the Serpent beguilde Eve through his subtilty so their minds should be corrupt from that simplicity which is in Christ 2 Cor. 11. 2 3. And in like manner entertained feare least when he came he should not find them such as he would and that he should be found unto them such as they would not c. 2 Cor. 12. In like manner I should think it is good for a man to be jealous over himselfe with a godly jealousy least their minds should be corrupt their wayes corrupt more then they are a ware of and there upon give themselves to the examining of themselves and to the searching and trying of their wayes whereunto the Holy Ghost exhorts us Lament 3. 40. And there is good comfort to be taken in such a jealousy such a feare such a course For we find that the spirit of bondage making us to feare is the forerunner of the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father Rom. 8. 15. Certainely they are in better case and nearer to the Kingdome of God then such as feare not yet is their no cause of despaire for as much as the elect of God had no evidence of their election before their calling Nay after their calling they may be much afflicted with the feares and terrours of God thinking themselves to be in worse case then indeed they are David found cause to pray that God would restore him to the joy of his Salvation yet Bertius would not say that David was fallen from grace and that propter graves causas yet who hath written more eagarly to maintaine that Saints may fall away from grace then Bertius But this Author beares before him such a spirit of confidence as if he would have all men ordered by his rules When Manoahs Wife Judg. 13. 22 23. discourseth thus If the Lord would kill us he would not have received a burnt offering at our hands nor shewed us these things He
is capable of For their grounds are universall as they professe that is common to all to wit as touching the love of God that it is common to all as touching the death of Christ that he dyed for all as touching the Covenant of grace that it also is common to all And if this will comfort any man namely to be assured that he is in as good a case as any Turke or Saracen or any reprobate in the World I find this Author is ready to assure them hereof and rather then faile he will sweare it though I never heard matter of faith put to be tryed by mans Oath till now I had thought only matters of fact had been tryable and assurable by Oath not matter of faith Yet I will not spare to professe that though they should sweare either of these universalities to be true I would no more believe them then I would believe the Divell For the Apostle adviseth saying Though that wee or an Angell from Heaven Preach unto you otherwise then that which we have Preached unto you let him be accursed Gal 1. 8. But let us examine the comfortable nature of these universalities whether they be such as a sober man can say nothing to the contrary I begin with the universality of Gods love the comfort herehence proceeds thus as I conceive God loves all willes all to be saved therefore thou art no reprobate Now consider whether I may not soberly say to the contrary that by the same reason there is no reprobate in the World or ever was whence it followes that I have no more comfortable assurance that I am no reprobate then I have assurance that there is no Reprobate at all in the World Secondly would you have mee believe hand over head that God would have all to be saved without distinction may not I soberly inquire whether your meaning be that God will have all and every one to be saved whether they believe or no whether they repent or no or only thus That God will have all to be saved in case they believe and repent not otherwise Now this is our doctrine as well as yours grounded upon this Scripture Whosoever believeth shall be saved Now doth this doctrine assure any man that he is no Reprobate nor of the number of those whom God hath rejected from salvation Perhaps you will say it is sufficient to assure him that he is no absolute reprobate and that so this Author is to be understood though hitherto in this Section he delivered it simply Admit this Now judge I pray you whether I may soberly oppose against it thus Although I am no absolute reprobate yet if I am a reprobate and may be as much assured of it as that there is any reprobate in the World what comfort can arise to my poore afflicted soule from hence Againe consider that neither we who oppose Arminians doe maintaine that God hath ordained to deny any man salvation absolutely but only conditionally to wit in case he dye in sinne without faith without repentance But suppose I am perswaded that God hath rejected mee from the grace of faith and of repentance what comfort can you Arminians administer to my sick soule in this case For dare you deny faith and repentance to be a gift of God So then if I conceive my selfe to be a reprobate from grace will you comfort me by saying that I am no absolute reprobate from grace Then belike God hath determined to give or deny grace not according to the meere pleasure of his will but according to mens workes And have you no better balme of Gilead to administer to a sick soule then to take sanctuary in such a Doctrine as is direct and flat Pelagianisme In the same sober manner we shall have somewhat to say against that comfort that is reached forth to an afflicted soule from the universality of Christs death Thou doubtest thou art a reprobate but be of good cheere for Christ dyed for all and every one as much as to say thou hast no more cause to believe that thou art a reprobate then to believe that there is any reprobate in the world Secondly be of good cheere for albeit thou art a reprobate and God foreseeing thou wilt dye in sinne hath from everlasting ordained thee to condemnation as well a Judas that betrayed Christ yet I can assure thee thou art no absolute reprobate no more then Judas was And whereas it may be thou art verily perswaded that he that believes and repents and perseveres herein shall not be damned for as much as all confesse that God hath not ordained that damnation shall be inflicted absolutely according to the meere pleasure of God but meerely according to mens workes but all thy feare is least thou art reprobated from grace and that absolutely considering that God as it seemes in the giving and denying of grace proceeds meerely according to the meere pleasure of his will because the Apostle saith He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. Yet be of good cheere for I can assure thee that is nothing so but as there are no absolute reprobates from glory and unto damnation so there are no absolute reprobates from grace but meerely conditionally it is that men are reprobated from grace like as meerely conditionally God doth elect men unto grace And to speake in plaine termes without dissimulation God gives faith and repentance unto men according as they dispose themselves thereunto for want of which disposition he denyes it unto others And if thou desirest to be more particularly informed in this mistery for thine unspeakable consolation know for certain that if thou wilt believe and repent thou shalt believe and repent And albeit in the Synod of Palestine anno 415. it was concluded That grace is not given according unto merits and Pelagius was driven to subscribe thereto for feare of excommunication too in case he had refused it yet take this comfortable mystery along with thee that this was but a fruit of the Predestinarian Heresy which that very yeare if thou markest the story well had his originall and was brought forth into the World And lastly as touching the universality of the Covenant of grace that is as comfortable as the former for all are under it and therefore thou amongst the rest and consequently thou art no more a reprobate then any other certainly no absolute reprobate for there are none such Iudas was not and therefore thou maist assure thy selfe thou art not And indeed there are none that maintaine that God decreed that any man should be denyed glory or damned absolutely but only conditionally to wit in case he finally persevere in infidelity or impenitency And whereas thou maist feare least thou art absolutely reprobated from grace to wit from the grace of faith and repentance take heart and feare no colours For albeit it be fit to confesse considering the times that faith and repentance are the
hell hath a being and by consequent something that is good If therefore God may take away a man's being that is innocent and turne him into nothing for his pleasure much more may he torment him in hell I am glad to see my name so often remembred by this Authour in his margent for a long time I desired to know his way by certaine evidence for I would not suffer my selfe to be carried away with rumours and withall I found some contradiction in the relations I received from different persons but at length I was so happy as to see it under his own hand and there to observe not his judgment only but the strength of his affections also Now let the Reader observe the cunning carriage of this Authour and how farre off it is from all ingenuitie For what I discourse being drawne thereunto by Arminius his excursions that this Authour obtrudes upon me as if the defence of the cause I tooke in hand had drawn me thereunto notwithstanding that I have professed the contrary For thus I write l. 1. pag. 1. De electione Sect 4. pag. 127. In the canvasing of this section Arminius runs out at large saving that most of these things which here he heapes up are aliena and nothing pertinent to the present purpose as pertaining rather to the decree of reprobation then to the decree of election And a little after I write thus Hence it is that Arminius expatiates and transfers his disputation from the point of election to the point of Reprobation too unseasonably Yet wisely affecting the incolumity of his wavering cause By that right saith he which God hath over his creature he cannot ordaine any man to the suffering of pain without the foresight of sinnne To wit that his cause might stand upright and that this examiner might omit nothing that tends to the making of his opinion plausible with his propitious reader it was needfull that he should make use of some such transition though never so unreasonable but seeing such are the wiles and artifices of our Adversaries to confound all Scholasticall method it shall not be unseasonable for me to weigh what he delivers as briefly as I can Therefore after I had refused Arminius on that point where he denyes that God can doe that injustice which he can doe by power after this manner I enter upon a new digression concerning this point Hitherto have I followed Arminius in his extravagants For M. Perkins hath not proceeded so farre as to affirme that God hath power to afflict an innocent creature neither hath his Adversaries objected any such thing unto him as justly inferred from ought delivered by him So that all such have well hardened their foreheads who faigne that our opinion cannot well subsist without the help of so horrid and so harsh an assertion to wit That it is better to be miserable then not to be at all It is true some may conceive that though this were a truth it were to be suppressed rather then affirmed by reason of the harshnesse of it Let every one consider aright that I undertake the defence of M. Perkins and it is he that hath uttered this harsh assertion namely That God can inflict hell paines without any demerit in the creature out of Cameracensis And it stood me upon to defend M. Perkins so farre as I had reason for it Now finding the maine argument whereby Arminius maintaines the contrary to that other yet more harsh proposition to be most unsound and even this assertion which sounds most harsh in the eares of many not only to be maintained by Austine himselfe and and divres Schoole-Divines but answered by many arguments the solution whereof was never expedited by any have I deserved so sharply to be censured for representing all this in the way of justifying M. Perkins whose defence I undertook against Arminius 1. My words are these translated God can annihilate the holiest creature which Arminius confesseth how much more is it in his power to afflict an innocent creature and that for ever considering that not only according to Schoole-divines but also according to Austine yea according to the truth it selfe it is more to be desired to have being under any pain then to have no being at all And afterwards I propose not one argument of mine own for the justifying of this but only represent the discourse of Austine hereupon as it is analized by Durandus that Schoole Divine Now why are not the School-men censured as men speaking unreasonably and against common sense Nay why is not Austine censured as one that had rather speak unreasonably and against common sense then lay downe the conclusion which he hath once undertaken to maintain as well as my selfe Yea and much more considering that the discourse proving this is Saint Austin's and had I not added on the by these four words etiam secundum ipsam veritatem there had been no place at all for any censure to be past upon me If a man finding himselfe convicted by Austin's discourse shall confesse that what he writes is true is it equity to censure him as one who had rather speak unreasonably and against common sense then lay down the conclusions which formerly he hath undertaken to maintain When in the mean time no censure is at all passed upon Austine who alone is the player of the game he that stands by professing only in his judgment he playes his game well 2. If Austine hath spoken unreasonably and against common sense how comes it to passe that this censurer hath not taken the paines to represent unto the world the unreasonablenesse of his argument This authour spends his mouth frankly in censuring but takes no paines to free his Reader from errour by solving arguments produced by Austin for the proofe of that wich this Authour conceives to be an errour 3. Nay he doth not so much as answer that one argument which here is proposed by me An argument which the Scoole-men use as sufficiently convincing the truth as Durandus and Ricardus Yet considering the unreasonable condition of such adversaries who take no course to convince or confute their opposites but imperiously to cry them down I have taken the paines to call to an account both Austin's arguments and others proposed by Schoole-Divines and to devise with my selfe what answer might be made unto them so to performe that for my adversaries which they shew no hart to performe for themselves and I was borne in hand that such a digression of mine should be extant long ere this 4 Yet by the way I wonder not a little that one thing is pretermitted For if I mistake not this very Authour is the man that heretofore hath been very full mouthed in censuring not so much the doctrine it selfe as a certain answer I made to an argument brought out of Scripture against it namely from those words of our Saviour It had been better for that man if he had never been
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
have answered it and shewed the absurd interpretation that he makes of it He vaunts that he hath proved reprobation absolute to be unjust when he hath performed no thing lesse But making only a greate cracke he goes out like a squib and throughout meddles not with one argument that our Divines bring out of Scripture or reason to justifie their doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of reprobation And it is apparent that he denies the absolutenesse of election as well as the absolutenesse of reprobation and consequently must necessarily maintaine that grace is given according to works whereupon it was that Austin grounded his doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of Predestination And upon the like ground have we as good cause to ground our doctrine concerning the absolutenesse of reprobation it being every way as evident that Grace is not denied according unto works as that it is not granted according to mens works And the Scripture is equally as expresse concerning both where it is said that as God hath mercy on whom he will so also whom he will he hardneth Pag 75. 76. Treating of God's sincerity Sub-sect 1. There are two passages inserted taken out of Piscator before the passages alleadged out of Zanchy and Bucer For having said that Now God's meaning is by this doctrine that the most of those to whom he offereth his grace and glory shall have neither forthwith he gives instance in Piscator thus And so Piscator saith Grace is not offered by God even to those who are called with a meaning to give it but to the Elect only Gratia non offertur à Deo singulis â—licet vocatis animo communicandi eam sed solis electis In the same booke he hath such an other speech Non vult Deus reprobos credere liâ—etliâ—gua profiteatur se velle Though God in words protest he would have reprobates to believe yet indeed he will not have them they make God to deale with men in matters of salvation as the Poets feigne the Gods to have dealt with poore Tantalus They placed him in a cleare and goodly river up to the very chin and under a tree which bare much sweet and pleasant fruit that did almost touch his lips but this they did with a purpose that he should tast of neither For when he put his mouth to the water to drinke it waved away from him And when he reached his hand to the fruit to have eaten of it it withdrew it selfe presently out of his reach so as he could neither eate nor drinke Just so dealeth God with reprobates by their doctrine He placeth them under the plentifull meanes of salvation offereth it to them so plainly that men would thinke they might have it when they will yet intendeth fully they shall never have it withholding from them either the first grace that they cannot believe or the second grace that they cannot persevere Did not those gods delude Tantalus yes doubtlesse And if God doe so with reprobates what did he but delude them and dissenible with them in his fairest and likeliest offers of salvation that he makes them And this doe Zanchius and Bucer grant by evident consequence as appeareth by a speech or two of theirs which cannot stand with their conclusion and therefore I suppose fell unwarily from them This treatise of Piscator De praedestinatione against Schaffman I have the second editition printed at Herborne Anno 1598. But these words according to their quotations here are not to be found the severall distinct passages are distinguished by numbers which in all editions hold the same not so the pages Yet the latter passage quoted p. 143. I meet with in mine p. 128. According to the like difference I try whether I can find out the other but in vaine But yet I meet with such matter of discourse as whereunto this passage is very congruous to be there delivered if any where yet no such thing is there delivered as num 74. Schaffman's argument is this If God calls all to salvation then he will save all To this Piscator answereth The proposition is false But he calls with animo simplici atque vero a simple mind and true Sane saith Piscator as much as to say I grant that but so as that he calls them with condition of repentance and faith Therefore as he promiseth salvation seriously unto them that performe this condition and therefore performes this promise So on the contrary he doth seriously threaten death and damnation to them who doe not fulfill the condition and performes unto him that commination Then though God be not capable of hypocrisy yet he doth not alwaies will that what he commands shall be alwaies performed by him to whom he gives that command Whether by commanding he meanes to prove a man as to prove Abraham he commanded him to sacrifice his Son or because to him whom he commandeth he will not give grace to performe that command as he deales with reprobates And num 120. To Schaffman's objection which was this God is no hypocrite he answers thus But yet he gives not grace to all to performe what he commands theÌ„ For promiscuously he commands as well reprobates as elect to believe as many as he calls by the preaching of the gospell but he gives this grace to his elect alone according to that To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdome of heaven but to them it is not given So that undoubtedly God offers grace to wit pardon of sinne with a purpose to communicate it to all that shall believe according to the judgment of Piscator neither doth he offer it with a purpose to communicate it to any unlesse they believe But the grace of faith is not offered to any with a purpose to communicate it upon a condition For then grace should be conferred according unto works which is manifest Pelagianisme As for the other which I meete with p 128. num 120 take it at full and not as it is dismembred by this Authour who cares not how he calumniates so he might advantage his own cause Schaffman's objection was Deus est unius linguae voluntatis God is both of the same tongue and will Whereto Piscator answers thus Your meaning is that God look what he professeth with his tongue that he willeth But this saith he is not alwaies true nor in all particulars For by his tongue that is by speech uttered he professed that he would have Abraham to sacrifice his Son Isaac yet he would not have him sacrificed With his tongue he professed by his servant Ionas that he would destroy Nineveh within forty dayes yet he would not so doe With his tongue by the ministers of the Gospell he professeth that he would have the reprobates to whom he speaketh among his Elect to believe the Gospell in as much as he commands them so to doe yet he would not have them to believe in as much as he will not
unto the Reader to judge as he shall think most agreeably And to confesse a truth unto you it is but lately I came to this order following the rigorous Tenet before as seemeth most consonant to reason though harsh to mens affections and being but lately fallen upon it I am apt to conceive that something may be wanting to the full clearing of the truth in this point a way whereunto I hope I have opened yet if you shall think it inconvenient I shall be content to pretermit it wholly and leave out all my digressions of this argument or any other II. Now touching Angels I pray let not ought that I have written make you sorry for ought that you have delivered touching the election of Angels And doe not you conceive of me amisse as if I did conceive you to harbour any ill opinion thereabouts For I professe I doe not neither have you given me any cause yet from nine yeeres of age I have known you The first time I wrote of that I onely said it seemed strange unto me my reason was because I never knew any either by writing or otherwise Protestant or Papist sound in maintaining mans election by grace but that in like sort he maintained the election of Angels to be of grace And whereas you professed otherwise onely as an opponent I conceived you did it but as my selfe or any other Schollar will doe to try the uttermost of anothers strength with whom we dispute But when the second time you wrote hereon you professed to doubt whether Arminius acknowledged any election at all of Angels that seemed to me as strange because I am perswaded that no Arminian or Lutheran denieth the election of Angels though like enough they are apt to fashion it according to their opinion of the election of men As for the construction of that place in Timothy touching the elect Angels I could not ascertain my selfe in what sense it might be conceived to proceed without acknowledging their election and I was loath to divine at random Now as you expresse your selfe herein more particularly so will I particularly make answer First I grant that a conditionall decree is no election But seeing it is impossible but God should foresee on whose part the condition would be performed and on whose part not herehence it followeth that God must accordingly Elect the one and Reprobate the other and so there must be acknowledged even an election of Angels after their manner Like as the Arminians beside that conditionall predestination of men you speake of doe acknowledge a precise election of some upon foresight of their obedience and reprobation of the other upon foresight of their disobedience Touching the exposition of that 1 Tim. 5. 21. I have consulted Hemingius a man as erroneous in the point of election as any Lutheran yet he interpreteth the place thus Hos Electos ad discrimen Reproborum vocat I grant it denotes the dignity of their persons but still in respect of choice as when we say a choice Book a choice Jewell as much as to say which a man would make choice of and preferre before many so the Elect Angels are so called in respect of choice which choice to my understanding can have no congruous reference but to the choice of God It is true we have nothing like such Scripture evidence touching the election and reprobation of Angels as of Men. But whereas in these points both Scripture evidence and light of Christian reason doe concurre so the light of Christian reason doth make it as evident on the part of Angels as on the part of man namely that nothing can possibly be the cause of Gods will or predestination quoad actum volentis or praedestinantis And Aquinas as you have heard professeth That never any man was so mad as to professe that any thing without God could be the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis and herein you your selfe agree Now touching Austin I am glad you have lighted upon him I do â—bâ— not but he shall perswade you in this point though I could not And first I will accommodate an answer to your allegations Secondly I will endeavour to shew clearly his opinion in this point Your first allegation is Caeteri autem per ipsum liberum arbitrium in veritate steterunt but your selfe perceive it might be answered that this might be delivered inclusa gratia speciali And it may be proved that this phrase of speech doth not exclude speciall grace for in the same Chapter it is afterwards said of man thus In quo statu recto ac sine vitio si per ipsum liberum arbitrium manere voluisset Here you must not exclude speciall grace in this case For si manere voluisset undoubtedly this will of his had been wrought by speciall grace as Austin manifesteth in the chapter following For he distinguisheth of two graces or two adjutories the one was ut posset pernianere si vellet the other was ut vellet quod potuit his words are these est in nobis per hane Dei gratiam in bono recipiendo perseveranter tenendo non solum posse quod volumus veruns etiam velle quod possumus Quod non fuit in homine primo unum enim horum in illo fuit alterum non fuit Namque ut reciperet bonum gratiâ non egedat quia nondum perdider at ut autem in eo permaneret egebat adjutorio gratiae sine quo iâ emnino non posset acceperat posse si vellet sed non habuit velle quod posset nam si babuisset perseverasset But you bring a second place to prove that Angels could have stood by their free-will secluding speciall grace and that is this Credimus Dominum Deum sie ordinasse Angelorum hominum vitam ut in ea prius ostenderet quid posset eorum liberum arbitrium deinde quid posset suae gratiae beneficium justitiaeque judicium I grant the Angels had power to stand if they would and power to fall if they would and this power was manifested in the standing of the one and in the fall of the other But herehence it followeth not that therefore the act of standing was not of Gods grace But you will say the benefit of grace was afterwards manifested And I answer that grace was the grace of confirmation opposite to the Obduration of the evill Angels which grace of confirmation though it were manifested after the obedience of the good Angels consisting in assurance that they shall never fall yet herehence it followeth not that their standing was not by grace though that grace whereby they stood was different from that grace whereby they were confirmed for before their obedience so they stood as that withall they might fall but since their obedience they now so stand that they cannot fall Now for Austins opinion hereabouts it is plaine enough from other places De civ dei lib. 12. cap 9. aut minorem
decrees to damne him for all his actuall sins aswell as originall sinne and finall perseverance in them And that in the same moment he foresaw all their sins not that the foresight of their sinnes is antecedent or subsequent to but concomitant or conjunct with his decree of their damnation in the same moment not of time onely but of nature also Undoubtedly actuall sinnes are more apt to justifie God in damning any man than sinne originall yet you maintaine that God decrees to damne a man without the foresight of that which doth more justifie God in damning any man onely you deny that he can decree to damne any man without the foresight of that which doth lesse justifie God in the actuall damnation of any one You will have the foresight of mans actuall sins to follow the decree of damnation which I dare not avouch not onely because it is harsh to mens affections but because it is repugnant in my judgement to manifest reason onely I deny the foresight of all sinnes to be antecedent to this decree I say t is neither antecedent to it which is the dissolute opinion nor subsequent after it which is the rigid opinion and each of them equally untrue but it is conjunct or concomitant to it in the same moment of nature both these degrees being the decrees de mediis and so making up one formall compleat decree de mediis ad eundem finem tendentibus which is the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice as I have shewed at large in my third digression amongst those which I heare are lately brought into your hands But I wonder not a little what you are fallen upon in the next place 8. As touching the election and reprobation of Angells I have nothing to say because the Scripture saith nothing It is true that it could not be made ex communi massa corrupta because there was none such But why it might not be out of the foresight of their personall obedience or disobedience I know no great matter to object Nor will it follow that if they were elected upon such considerations we must be so too for our case is wholly different as the Scripture denyeth that of us Resp Hitherto you have discoursed as it were out of the month of our Divines who yet as I have shewed in my eighth Digression are for the most part nothing for this opinion which you propose being rightly understood But in this point not one is for you nor ever could I observe any of our Divines that maintained not the election of Angells to be of as free grace as the election of men or the reprobation of Angells to be of as free Soveraignty and absolutenesse in the denyall of grace as the reprobation of men Arminius never durst professe this which you doe but still puts it off as a matter he hath nothing to doe withall treating onely of the predestination of men which he would never have done had he any hope to make good that opinion which you seeme more to incline unto than to the contrary But though you see no great matter to object against it yet others doe that hold it absolutely impossible to be otherwise namely impossible that any thing in the creature should be the cause of the will of God quoad actum volentis or of predestination quoad actum praedestinantie Insomuch that Aquinas professeth never any man was so mad as to maintaine that there could be any cause of the will of God p. 1. q. 23. Art 5. in Corp. Cum praedestinatio includat voluntatem sic inquirenda est ratio praedestinationis sicut inquiritur ratio divinae voluntatis Dictum est autem suprà quod non est assignare â—iusam divine voluntatis ex parte actus volendi sed potest assignari ratio ex parte volitorum c. Deus vult esse aliquid propter aliud Nulius ergo fuit it a insanae mentis qui diceret merita esse causam Divina praedestinationis ex parte actus praedestinantis sed hoc sub questione vertitur utrum ex parte effectus praedestinatio habeat aliquam causam Et hoc est quaerere utrum Deus praeordinaverit se daturum effectum praedestinationis alicui propter aliquam causam And whereas Suarius hath laboured to helpe himselfe with a shifting distinction betweene causa and ratio as if there might be ratio voluntatis divinae from without though not causa and finding these tearmes promiscuously used by Aquinas in his summes flyeth out to his booke contra Gentes and Ferrarienses thereupon to get hold of somewhat therehence for his advantage yet I have endeavoured to beat that fox out of his holes in my third Digression upon election 2. Are they not called in Scripture the elect Angells Now marke Austins discourse If upon the foresight of mans obedience God elect any man it shall not be said Non vos me elegistis sed ego vos elegi but on the contrary rather vos me elegistis non ego elegi vos For if election of Angells followed upon their obedience they did first choose God that is choose to obey him before God did choose them that is choose to save them 3. If Angells were elected upon their obedience then either by necessity of nature this came to passe or by the free constitution of God It cannot be said by necessity of nature Ergo by his free constitution whence it followeth that God did ordaine that upon the obedience of Angells he would ordaine them to eternall life Now judge you whether one decree of God can possibly be the object of another decree all decrees of God being eternall and the objects of Gods decrees being meerely temporall as appeares in the decree of creation preservation redemption vocation justification sanctification salvation 4. No good act can be wrought but by God and by his grace it is he that workes in us both the will and the deed of his good pleasure Doe you not thinke it is so in Angells also otherwise what cause have they to give God thankes for their election as namely if it sprang from their obedience But suppose you deny this yet all confesse no naturall action can be wrought much lesse gratious without Gods concourse as the efficient cause thereof Now consider doth God concurre modo nos velimus which is Suarius his devise consider I pray you the contradiction included in this Tenet God is the cause working not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perficere but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 velle as they confesse Now is it possible that God concurreth ad velle modo nos velimus can the same thing be the condition of it selfe It may as well be before it selfe Againe supposing we doe velle it is not possible by the power of God that we should not velle for factum infectum reddere me Deus quidem potest But this I have farther prosecuted in a Digression by it selfe
so as if we maintained that God ordained them to be damned absolutely and for the meer pleasure of God concealing the only cause for which God ordained that they should be damned namely for the wilfull transgression of Gods holy Commandements Only the giving and denying of the grace of regeneration the giving of faith and repentance for the curing of that naturall infidelity and impenitency that is found in all and the leaving it uncured by denying faith and repentance this indeed we maintain to be absolute according to that of Saint Paul he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. Now dare any of them deny faith and repentance to be the gift of God They doe not they dare not only of late they have come thus farre as to deny that Christ merited faith and regeneration for any Secondly inquire whether God gives faith and repentance to some and denyes it to others of his meere will and pleasure or because he finds some good works in the one which he finds not in the other Here is the criticall poynt we defend no other absolutenesse of election and reprobation but such as depends wholly on this namely that God finding men equall in corruption hath compassion on some giving them faith and repentance which he denies unto others All other absolutenesse of Election and Reprobation besides that which we undertake by cleare demonstration to deduce herehence we utterly renounce Neither can our adversaries be so grossely ignorant as not to perceive that this is the criticall poynt of these controversies the resolution of the truths wherein will set an end to all contention about Election and Reprobation Why then doe they not deale plainly and try their strength in this whereby they should carry themselves fairely and ingenuously and deale above board For here alone is that absolutenesse of God in execution which we maintaine but here they are not so prone to shew their hornes this argument is not so fit for the raising of clamours and Tragedies And hating the truth of God as touching his soveraignty over his creatures to have compassion on whom he will and to harden whom he will as also the prerogatives of his grace to work us effectually to that which is pleasing in his fight and that in whom he will also yet not daring plainly to deliver their mind in this as wherein they are found most absurd and encumbred with shamefull contradictions therefore by the back dore as it were they hope to discredit it and by opposing the absolutenesse of Reprobation to supplant and undermine the Doctrine of Gods free grace And not content with this they miserably corrupt our doctrine also in the poynt of absolute Reprobation drawing it to this as if not reprobation only but damnation also were made absolute by us and that God damned men not so much in the way of justice for their sinne as of his own meere pleasure At length to come to the third particular of his reply 3. And that is this that howbeit some things in Scripture which are peculiar to the Gospell are above our understandings and must without hesitation be believed yet many things there have their foundation in nature and may be apprehended by the light of nature and amongst these the justice of Gods waies is one as hath been shewed Isai 5. 3. and Ezek. 18. To this I answer That the waies of God mentioned Isai 5. 3. is only in his expecting fruits after so great pains that he had taken in husbanding his vineyard And Ezek. 18. consists only in rendring unto men according to their waies Neither doth it follow that because the justice of God doth plainly appeare in these particulars therefore it doth appeare as cleerely or comprehensively in all others Is there no difference between the waies of God there mentioned and the waies of Gods justice mentioned in other place as namely in causing the Sonnes of Achan to be stoned to death with Achan himselfe for his Sacriledge in drowning the old World not sparing the very Infants and sucklings and for their conspiracy against Moses and Aaron causing the earth to swallow up not Dathan and Abiram only but their Wives and Children and all that they had So in consuming Sodom and Gomorrah with fire And as for the punishing of of sinne this is no peculiar truth of the Gospell I had thought the Gospell in the proper nature thereof had been above reason altogether and no way capable of demonstration And as for the justice of God must not this suppose him to be a free agent Or was this known to Aristotle by all the light of nature whereunto he attained We that believe him to be a free agent and withall the creator of all are ready to demonstrate that it is in his power to doe what he will with his creature and that not only to annihilate him though never so holy but to inflict what paine soever upon him yea even the torment of hell fire which Medina acknowledgeth to have been Communem omnium Theologorum sententiam viz. that this he can doe ut Dominus vitae mortis as I have shewed in my Vindiciae graciae Dei and by variety of arguments proved it more then once in two severall digressions which this Author pretends to have seen yet answereth not one of them And as for justice divine toward the creature whereupon this Author doth with such confidence discourse both Vasquez and Suarez Jesuits in other poynts concerning Gods justice are miserably at odds yet joyntly concurre in this that all iustice Divine doth presuppose the free determination of Gods will Now because I find this Gentleman so conceited of the purity of his rationall faculty and the power thereof as to require that all interpretation of Scripture should veyle bonnet to the soveraignty thereof I purpose to try his ability this way for the expediting of certain arguments about the absolutenesse of Gods decrees in generall and particularly of the decree of Reprobation Therefore to combate with him on his own ground and in his own element I dispute thus 1. No temporall thing can be the cause of that which is eternall but the sinnes of men are all temporall whereas Reprobation is eternall therefore the sinnes of men cannot be the cause of Reprobation If it be said that sinne is not made the cause of reprobation but as it exsists in Gods foresight and so not so much sinne as the prescience of sinne is the cause of reprobation I reply that this device cannot stand viz. that the prescience of sinne should be the cause of reprobation and that for this reason The cause of reprobation whereof we enquire is of the nature of a meritorious cause But the prescience of God can no way be said to be a meritorious cause thereof Science and prescience are causes of Gods works in the kind of an efficient Physicall not in the kind of an efficient morall such as are
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