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
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
death upon a sinner of meere pleasure but being provoked thereunto and that according to the purport of the first place Ezech 18. by the sinner himselfe and also according to the purport of the second place only in case of impenitency And I concurre with him in this And so I conceive it to be delivered in the same sense with that Lament 3. 32 33. For though he cause griefe to wit by reason of mens sinnes v. 39. yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies to wit in case he repents Ier. 18. 7. Iudg. 10. 16. For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men Mark I pray not willingly to wit in as much as he is provoked thereunto by sinne and by refusall to repent And this is in the former Scripture phrases not to take pleasure in the afflicting and grieving of men For if any work be such as wherein pleasure is taken we need not enquire after a cause why it is done but though no pleasure be taken in it yet for some benefit redounding thereby a man may doe it yea though it be grievous and bitter unto him As a sick man is willing to take a bitter potion for the recovery of his health Now come we to the argument God takes no pleasure in the death of any therefore he doth not of pleasure inflict death We willingly grant it in as much as he never inflicts eternall death on any that doth not dye in sinne unrepented of And as he doth not inflict death on any of meere pleasure that is without just cause on the part of him that dyeth deserving it So we willingly confesse that God did never decree to inflict death on any without just cause on the Malefactors part deserving death And this is the uttermost whereunto this Authors argument can be extended And all our Divines unanimously confesse that God neither decreed to damne any man of his meer pleasure but for his sinne wherein he died without repentance 3. Observe the cunning of this Disputer to deceive himselfe first and then to abuse his readers For whereas he should have proceeded in his argument by degrees thus God hath no pleasure in the death of a sinner therefore he doth not of his own pleasure inflict death and thence proceed if he had thought good to conclude the like of Gods decree thus if God doth not of his ownpleasure inflict then neither doth he of his own pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation This author leaping over the inflicting of death as a block in his way for the last consequence would have betrayed its own nakednesse flyeth at first to the application of it to Gods decree Now I willingly grant that Gods having no pleasure in the death of a sinner doth signify that God inflicts death on no man without a cause for that were of meer pleasure to inflict But dares he herehence inferre therefore God doth not of meer pleasure decree to inflict death and damnation on man for sinne for to this alone comes all the force of this argument Now to shew the vanity of this consequence consider I pray 1. It is as if he should argue thus in plain termes sinne is alwaies the meritorious cause of damnation therefore sinne is the meritorious cause of Gods eternall decree of damnation Now this Enthymeme hath no force any farther then it may be reduced into a Categoricall Syllogisme and this Enthymeme is reducible into no other Syllogisme then this Damnation is the decree of Damnation sinne is the cause of Damnation therefore sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But in this Syllogisme the proposition containes a notorious untruth Or thus Sinne is the cause of damnation therefore the foresight of sinne is the cause of the decree of damnation But this Enthymeme is not reducible unto any categoricall Syllogisme at all for as much as it consists of foure termes all which must be clapt into the Syllogisme whereunto it is reduced and consequently make that Syllogisme consist of foure termes which utterly overthrowes the illative forme thereof 2. We may as well dispute thus Good works as well as faith and repentance are the disposing cause unto salvation therefore good works as well as faith and repentance or the foresight of them are the disposing cause to Gods election or to the decree of salvation But shall I tell you the chiefe flourish whereupon this Author and usually the Arminians doth insist in this his loose argumentation I conceive it to be this they hope their credulous readers unexpert in distinguishing between Gods eternall decree and the temporall execution thereof will be apt hereupon to conceit that we maintain that God doth not only of meer pleasure decree whatsoever he decreeth but also that he doth decree of meer pleasure to damne men which yet is utterly contrary if I be not deceived to the tenet of all our Divines all concurring in this that God in the execution of the decree of damnation proceeds according to a Law and not in the execution of reprobation only but also in the execution of election And the law is this Whosoever believes shall be saved whosoever believes not shall be damned And like as he inflicteth not damnation but by way of punishment so he conferres not salvation but by way of reward But in the execution of his decrees of election unto grace and reprobation from grace we willingly professe that God proceeds according to no law given unto men to prepare themselves hereunto but meerly according to his good pleasure having mercy on whom he will and hardning whom he will And this indeed is the criticall poynt of this controversy But neither this Author nor his complices some of them of my knowledge have any heart to deale on this I come to his Second pregnant place as he calleth it DISCOURSE SECT II. GOD hath shut up all in unbeliefe that he might have mercy on all Rom. 11. 32. in these words of the Apostle are two all 's of equall extent the one standing just against the other an all of unbelievers and an all of objects of mercy look how many unbelievers there be on so many hath God a will of shewing mercy And therefore if all men of all sorts and conditions and every man in every sort be an unbeliever then is every man of every condition under mercy And if every man be under mercy then there is no antecedent precise will in God of shutting up some and those the most from all possibility of obtaining mercy for these two are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they cannot stand together TWISSE Consideration I Willingly grant the word all in each place is of equall extent but how in the Apostles meaning in this place that is look in what sense the Apostle takes the word all when he saith God hath concluded all under unbeliefe in the same sense he takes the word all when he sayeth that he might have mercy
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
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
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
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
shewing the like grace to them which he shewed to others 1. So that the moving cause of Reprobation is the alone will of God and not the sinne of man originall and actuall like as on the other side the moving cause of election is only the will of God or not faith or any good workes whereupon this Authour is loath to manifest his opinion This doctrine is not only approved by Doctour Whitaker Doctour of the Chaire in the Universitie of Cambridge and that in his Cygnea Cantio a little before his death but justified and confirmed by varietie of Testimonies both of Schoolemen as Lumbard Aquinas Bannes Petrus de Alliaco Gregorius Arminensis of our owne Church and the Divines thereof as taught by Bucer at Cambridge by Peter Martyr at Oxon professed by the Bishops and others promoted by Queen Elizabeth and farther in the yeare of our Lord 1592 there was a famous recantation made in the Universitie of Cambridge by one Barret in the 37. of Elizabeth whereunto he was urged by the heads of houses of that Universitie The Recantation runnes thus Preaching in Latine not long since in the Universitie Church Right worshipfull many things slipt from me both falsly and rashsly spoken whereby I understand the mindes of many have been grieved to the end therefore I may satifie the Church the truth which I have publiquely hurt I doe make this publique confession both Repenting and Revoking my Errour First I said that no man in this transiâ—â—ie world is so strongly underpropt at least by the certainty of Faith that is unlesse as I afterwards expounded it by Revelation that he ought to be assured of his owne Salvation But now I protest before God and acknowledge in my conscience that they which are justified by faith have peace towards God that is have reconciliation with God and doe stand in that grace by faith therefore that they ought to be certaine and assured of their owne Salvation even by the certainty of Faith it selfe 2. Secondly I affirmed that the faith of Peter could not faile but that other mens faith may for as I then said Our Lord prayed not for the faith of every particular man but now being of a better and more sound Iudgment according to that which Christ teacheth in plaine words Ioh. 17. 20. I pray not for these alone that is the Apostles but for them also which shall believe in mee through their word I acknowledge that Christ prayed for the faith of every particular believer and that by the vertue of that prayer of Christ every true believer is so stayd up that his faith cannot faile 3. Thirdly touching perseverance to to the end I said that that certainty concerning the time to come is proud for as much as it is in his owne nature contingent of what kind the perseverance of every man is neither did I affirme it to be proud only but to be most wicked but now I freely protest that the true and justifiing faith whereby the faithfull are most neare united unto Christ is so firme as also for the time to come so certaine that it can never be rooted up out of the mindes of the faithfull by any temptation of the flesh the world or divell himselfe so that he that once hath this faith shall ever have it for by the benefit of that justifying faith Christ dwelleth in us and we in Christ therefore it cannot but be both increased Christ growing in us dayly as also persevere unto the end because God doth give constancy 4. Fourthly I affirmed that there was no distinction in faith but in the Persons believing in which I confesse I did erre Now I freely acknowledge the Temporarie faith which as Bernard witnesseth is therefore fained because it is temporary it is distinguished and differeth from the saving faith whereby sinners apprehending Christ are justified before God for ever not in measure and degrees but in the very thing it selfe Moreover I adde that Saint Iames doth make mention of a dead faith and Paul of a faith that worketh by love 5 Fifthly I added that forgivenesse of sinnes is an Article of faith but not particular neither belonging to this man or that man that is as I expounded it that no true faithfull man either can or ought certainely believe that his sinnes are forgiven But now I am of an other mind and doe freely confesse that every true faithfull man is bound by this Article of faith to believe the forgivenes of sinnes and certainely to believe that his owne particular sinnes are freely forgiven him neither doth it follow hereupon that that Petition of the Lord's prayer to wit forgive us our trespasses is needlesse for in that Petition we aske not only the gift but also the increase of Faith 6 Sixtly these words escaped me in my Sermon viz As for those that are not saved I doe most strongly believe and doe freely protest that I am so perswaded against Calvin Peter Martyr and the rest that sinne is the true and proper cause of Reprobation But now being better instructed I say that the Reprobation of the wicked is from everlasting and that saying of Saint Austine to Simplician to be mòst true viz If sinne were the cause of Reprobation then no man should be elected because God doth know all men to be defiled with it And that I may speak freely I am of the same mind and doe believe concerning the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation as the Church of England believeth and teacheth in the booke of the Articles of faith in the Article of Praedestination Last of all I uttered these words rashly against Calvin a man that hath very well deserved of the Church of God to wit that he durst presume to lift up himselfe above the high and Almighty God by which words I doe confesse that I have done great injurie to that most learned and right good man and I most humbly beseech you all to pardon this my rashnes as also in that I have uttered many bitter words against Peter Martyr Beza Zanchy Iunius and the rest of the same religion being the lights and ornaments of our Church calling them by the odious names of Calvinâ—sts and other slanderous termes branding them with a most grevious marke of reproach whom because our Church doth worthily reverence it was not meet that I should take away their good name from them Doctor Fulke in like manner maintaines that reprobation is not of workes but of God's free will Rom 9 Num 2. His words are these God's election Reprobation is most free of his owne will not upon the foresight of the merits of either of them for he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth vers 18. Yet here is to be distinguished for the explication of the truth That God's decree of Reprobation may be considered either as touching the Act of God reprobating and willing or as touching the things hereby willed or Decreed As
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
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
God that is not yet regenerated but yet neverthelesse they may be in good time Yet here also there is some defect for want of cleare explication of this truth For will you conclude hence that non-regeneration is the cause of infidelity as some doe in effect Why but this is either notoriously false or if true it is true in such a sense as whereby God is no more the cause thereof then a Physitian is the cause of a disease because he will not cure it For infidelity is a naturall fruit of mans hereditary corruption and God alone can cure it but if he will not God is not to be said to be the cause of any disobedience issuing therefrom otherwise then per modum non removentis by way of not removing the cause of it or per modum non dantis quod prohiberet by way of not curing the cause that is by not giving faith Now what harshnesse there is in this to as many as doe not concurre with the Pelagians so as in plain termes to professe that Grace is given according to mens works And the objection framed against Austin and grounded upon that doctrine which he acknowledged ranne thus Caeteri qui in peccatorum delectatione remoramini ideo nondum surrexistis quia nec dum vos adjutorium gratiae miserantis erexit Therefore you are not risen out of that delight you took in sinne because the succour of Gods grace hath not raised you not as Calvin expresseth it Therefore you believe not because ye are ordained to destruction And this very doctrine as formerly I said our Saviour spares not to apply to some particular persons and Preach it to their faces like as Moses Preacheth the very same doctrine to the Children of Israel Deut. 29. 2 3 4. Yet Austin to prevent harshnesse doth not like this manner of proposing it so well seeing it may be and it is fit it should be delivered coveniently thus Si qui autem ad huc in peccatorum damnabilium delectatione remoramini apprehenditis saluberrimam disciplinam Quod tamen cum feceritis nolite extolli quasi de operibus vestris aut gloriari quasi non acceperitis If any of you doe yet continue in the delightfull course of damnable sinnes take hold of wholesome discipline which when you have done be not proud thereof as of your own work or Glory as if you had not received this grace of God Now what advantagious service this first witnesse hath done him I am well content the indifferent may judge I come to his second witnesse that is of the Land-grave of Turing reported by Hesterbachius as I remember it is about the Twelfth Century of yeares since our Saviours incarnation This man being admonished by his friends of his dangerous and vitious courses made this answer Si praedestinatus sum nulla peccata poterunt mihi Regnum Caelorum auferre Si praescitus nulla bona mihi illud valebunt conferre It is not the first time I have met with this story not in Vossius only but in an Arminian Manuscript it seems they make some account of it yet I see no cause they should make any such account thereof It is the common voyce of prophane persons corrupting the doctrine of Predestination to serve their own turnes My selfe remember an instance of it in my minority when I was little more then a child and I remember both the Person whom and the place where it was delivered and it was accounted as a signe of a prophane heart yet this Vossius makes use of as an instance forsooth of a Predestination Heretique And I wonder why they doe not devise as well a Praescientiarian Heresy and that by as good an instance as this of one of Austins Monkes who being reproved by his brethren made the like answer as touching Gods praescience but yet with more sobriety saying Whatsoever I am now I shall be such as God foreseeth I will be Yet herein as Austin professeth he spake nothing but truth but the saying of the Landgrave implyes a notorious untruth namely that if he were predestinated he should be Saved though he continued in his sinfull courses Now this I say is a grosse untruth For predestination is the preparation of Grace as Austin desineth it and consequently such as are predestinated shall be taken off from their sinfull courses in good time and by Grace be brought unto Salvation In like sort he supposeth a Reprobate may be truly righteous whereas Austin professeth of such as are not predestinate that God brings none of them to wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby man is reconciled unto God in Christ what patience soever he affords them Contr. Jul. Pelag. l. 5. c. 4. Nay this kind of Argumentation drawn from destiny Stoicall wherewith our adversaries doe usually reproach our doctrine of Predestination like as the Pelagians did in the same manner reproach Saint Austins doctrine concerning Predestination I say this argument was in course and profligated in the daies of Cicero and censured as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an idle argumentation as before I mentioned and it is to be seen in Cicero his book De Fato and thereupon they distinguished of some things which they called Fatalia as victory and some things which they called Confatalia as all necessary meanes requisite to the getting of the victory And Origen though he be accounted a favourer of our adversaries Doctrine in his writings yet he shewes the vanitie of this Argument applyed to fate wherby undoubtedly he meanes providence divine For he proposeth such a kind of objection as if a sicke man should dispute himself from taking Physick after this maner Either by destiny is it appointed I shall recover or no If my destiny be to recover I shall recover though I use no Physicke if my destiny be not to recover all the Physitians in the world shal doe me no good And the vanity of this is represented by the like argument in another manner thus If it be thy desteny to beget children whether thou usest the company of Woemen or no thou shalt beget children And concludes thus Ut enim hic si fieri non potest ut quis procreat nisi cum muliere concubuerit sic si valetudinis recuperatio medicinae via efficitur necessariò adhibetur medicus The Greeke of Origen is set downe at large by Turnebus in his disputation upon Cicero his book De Fato against Ramus Now judge you I pray what colour of detriment to Religion hath he produced from our doctrine of absolute Reprobation and whether his discourse herein is any better then the imagination of a vaine thing DISCOURSE SECT IV. BUt there are two things chiefly which are said for the vindicating of this opinion from this crimination 1. First that many of them which believe and defend this opinion are Godly and holy men and therefore it doth not of it selfe open a way to liberty but through the wickednesse of men who pervert the
Augustini quisque teneat De me intelligo quemlibet ante uterum matris pradestinatum vel ad vitam vel ad mortem quod nunquam quisquam nisi in horâ mortis cognoscere potest Ego sum ex numero damnatorum ergo Deo nunquam asscribi possum Hoc certo credatis rectum esse quod Paulus Rom. 9. scribit Misereor cujus misereor Discedo ad lacus infernales Deo vos commendo cujus misericordia mihi negata est Et addit Major haec verba Hic est fructus perversae doctrinae de praedestinatione hominum Concerning which relation give me leave to observe somewhat 1. Here is no such thing as this Author relates that Hosuanus should say that man by Calvin and Austins opinion is not dealt withall secundum bona or mala opera and indeed this deciphering out of Austins and Calvins opinion is notoriously untrue neither as touching occultiores causae of mens eternall conditions as indeed it is apparent that in the way of a cause meritorious there is no other cause of damnation then sinne and in the way of a disposing cause no other cause of salvation then faith repentance and good workes And as touching the efficient cause of both none is or can be the cause thereof but God But as touching the cause why God gives grace to one and denyes it to another wee willingly confesse there is no cause thereof but the meere good pleasure of God In like sort of absolute cast-awayes here is no mention no nor of Vas formatum ad ignominiam nor any such saying of himselfe that he was none of the worst 2. Here is no mention made of the cause moving him hereunto as this Author pretends but only 't is said that it proceeded of desperation And though Major adds as a Coronis his censure that Hic est fructus perversae doctrinae de praedestinatione hominum yet I hope his censure is no Oracle with us no nor with Lutherans neither for I find him branded by Osiander in his Ecclesiasticall History And though he were of Austins and Calvins opinion in this poynt of predestination and did despaire yet it followes not that this doctrine moved him to despaire Suppose the conceit of being a reprobate moved him hereunto might it not move him hereunto according to the Arminian tenet as well and according to any tenet provided they doe not believe that God hath as yet decreed nothing or if he hath that his decrees may be recalled And then again by our Doctrine of Predestination it cannot be concluded of any man that he is a reprobate while he lives Nay this seems contrary to his own opinion which was this that no man can know whether he be predestinate to life or death till the houre of his death and his death was not brought upon him but wrought by him And as it was in his power not to have killed himselfe so was it in his power not to believe that he was a reprobate by this opinion of his Then again what moved him to conceive that he was a reprobate is concealed all along Now the conscience of sinne committed against the Holy Ghost may make a man conceive he is a reprobate of what opinion so ever he be concerning reprobation And as I take it That famous Doctor of Germany whom Goulartius mentioneth remaining then at Hall in Swabe was no Calvinist of whom he reports out of the History of Germany That having oftentimes turned his Conscience some times toward God some times toward the World having inclined in the end to the worser part said and confest publiquely that he was undone and fell so deepe into despaire as he could neither receive nor take any comfort or consolation so as in this miserable and wretched estate of his soule he slew himselfe most miserably It was not the doctrine of Predestination or Reprobation brought him unto this And though a man hath not sinned against the holy Ghost yet a conceit of such a sinne may drive a man unto this or of blasphemies in an inferior degree when God gives a man over unto the power of Satan as Gaulartius makes mention by his own experience of another desperate man whom he had heard who being exhorted to turne from the too vehement apprehension of Gods justice unto his mercy which was open unto him He answered very coldly you say true God is God but of his children not for me his mercy is certain for his elect but I am a reprobate a vessell of wrath and cursing and I doe already feele the torments of Hell When they did exhort him to call God his Father and Jesus Christ his Sonne My mouth saith he doth speake it but my heart hath horrour of it I believe that he is the Father of others but not of mee When they did lay before him that he had known God heard his word and received his Sacrament yea but he added I was an hypocrite and guilty of many blasphemies against God And then he returned to his ordinary discourses I am a vessell prepared to wrath and damnation I am damned I burne The same Goulartius reports out of the History of the times of a Learned man at Lovaine called Master Gerlach Who had profited so well in his studies as he was one of the first amongst the learned of that time And that being touched with a grievous sicknesse he sighed continually and feeling himselfe to draw neer his end he began to discover the ground of his sighes speaking such fearfull words as desperate men are accustomed to utter crying out and lamenting that he had lived very wickedly and that he could not endure the judgement of God for that he knew his sinnes were so great as he should never obtain pardon so as in this distresse he dyed oppressed with grievous and horrible despaire What this wickednesse of his was in speciall it seems he concealed it might be horrible enough though done in secret yet no just cause of despaire unlesse it were the sinne against the holy Ghost The like is recorded of M. Iames Latomus one of the chiefe Doctors of the University of Lovaine being one day out of countenance in a Sermon before the Emperour Charles the Fift returning ashamed and confounded from Brussells to Lovaine and did so apprehend the dishonour that he fell suddainly into despaire whereof he gave many testimonies in publique the which did move his friends to keepe him close in his house from that time unto his last gasp Poore Latomus had no other speech then that he was rejected of God that he was damned and that he hoped for no mercy nor salvation as having malitiously made warre against the grace and truth of God He dyed in this despaire neither was it possible for any friends or Physitians to make him change his opinion 3. If this story of Hosuanus be a truth I like his condition the worse for not giving any reason moving him to this desperation and
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
a true crimination but by flying to Gods absolute proceedings in giving or denying grace And albeit in this poynt wholly consists the Crisis of this Controversy yet this Author utterly declines the sifting thereof as some precipice and breake-neck unto his cause to wit Whether God gives and denyes grace according to the meere pleasure of his will or according to mens workes albeit the issue of all his comforts comes to this namely that either God is not the Author of our faith which now adaies the Remonstrants with open mouth professe that Christ merited for none or if to juggle with the World they pretend an acknowledgement that God is the Author of it yet they plainly professe that he dispenseth it to some and denyes it to others according to some good condition or disposition he findes in the one and which he findes not in another But let us take into consideration what these solid grounds of comfort are whereof a Minister is bereaved by our Doctrine Three I find here mentioned A treble Universality 1. of Gods love 2. Of Christs death 3. Of the Covenant of grace As if universality now adayes were a better Character of the Arminian faith then of the Roman Religion I may take liberty to equivocate a little when this Authour equivocates throughout and that in a case wherein iâ— is most intollerable in a case of consolation to be ministred to conscientia timorata as Nider calls it a poore afflicted soule as this Authour expresseth it To the discovery whereof I will now proceed having signified in the first place that all these consolations are no other but such as every Reprobate is capable of as well as the Children of God which is so apparent as needs no proofe only in the issue of their Tenet the faith of them freeth a man from the conceit of being an absolute Reprobate So that in effect it comes to this Thou poore afflicted soul be of good comfort for if thou wilt hearken unto me and imbrace those solid grounds of comfort which I will reveale unto thee assure thy selfe they shall be as the Balme of Gilead unto thy soule whereby thou maist be confident that albeit it may be thou art a Reprobate and that God from everlasting hath ordained thee unto damnation that yet certainly thou art no absolute Reprobate no more then Cain or Esau Saul or Judas or the Devills were For these my principles will assure thee that there never was nor is nor shall be any absolute Reprobate throughout the world 2. I come to the examining of them particularly to shew that every one of them is as it were against the haire So evident are the testimonies of Scripture against them all and they are obtruded upon a superficiary and most most unsound interpretation of Scripture in some places For 1. as touching the first the universality of Gods love For hereby Gods love is made indifferent unto all and consequently towards Esau as well as to Jacob whereas the Scripture professeth that God loved Jocob and hated Esau and this the Apostle makes equivalent to the Oracle dilivered to Rebekah concerning them before they were borne 2. He might as well have proposed it of the universallity of Gods mercy whereas the Scripture expressely distinguisheth between vessels of mercy vessells of wrath 3. This love is explicated by them to consist in a will to save all Now election is but Gods will to save and the Scripture plainly teacheth and it is confessed by all that I know excepting Coelius Secundus to whom this Authour it seemes is most beholding for his story of Spira that though Many are called yet but few are chosen And whereas it is confessed that the most part of men are Reprobates that is from everlasting willed unto condemnation yet never the lesse they beare us in hand that all men even Cain and Judas yea and as I think the Devills and all were willed by God unto Salvation And that there is no contradiction in all this And every poore afflicted soule must believe hand over head that all this is true what species of contradiction soever be found therein which this Authour from the begining of his discourse to the end hath taken no paines to cleare least otherwise he forfaits all hopes of comfort upon such soveraine grounds as are here proposed by faith wherein aman may be as well assured of his Salvation and freedome from damnation as any Reprobate in the World For albeit he be a Reprobate and God should reveale this unto him yet upon these grounds he may be confident that he is no absolute Reprobate 2. I come to the Second comfortable supposition and that is the universality of Christs death namely that he died for all Now this is opposite to Scripture evidence as the former yea and to Christian reason if not more For albeit God so loved the World even the whole World that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have Life Everlasting which gives a fair light of exposition to those places where Christ is said to have dyed for the sins of the World yea of the whole world to wit in this manner that whosoever believes in him shal not perish but have everlasting life yet the Scripture speaks as often of Christs death in a restrained sense as where it is said Christ gave himselfe a ransome for many And that his bloud was shed for his Apostles and for many for the remission of their sinnes And that Christ should save Gods people from their sinnes And that God hath purchased his Church with his bloud And Christ gave himselfe for his Church And that he is saviour of his body And that he dyed for the elect And in the 17 of John our Saviour would not pray for the World but only for those whom God had at that time given unto him and who afterward should believe in him through their word And look for whom he prayed with exclusion of the rest for their sakes he sanctified himself Now that this is spoken in reference to the offering of himselfe up unto God upon the crosse it was the joynt interpretation of all the Fathers whom Maldonate had read as he professeth on that place and there reckons up a multitude of them Then againe Christs death and passion we know was of a satisfactory nature and therefore if he dyed for all he satisfied for all the sinnes of all men why then are not all saved Why is any damned Is it just with God to torment with everlasting fire for those sinnes for which he hath received satisfaction and that a more ample one then mans satisfaction can be by suffering the torments of Hell fire For therefore it shall never end because it shall never satisfie Againe how many millions were at that time dead and in hell fire and did Christ satisfy for their sinnes by his death upon the Crosse and they continue still to
words ye therefore heare them not because ye are not of God now what reasonable mā can deny but that it is a sin not to heare God's words then doth not our Saviour plainly professe that the true cause hereof is because they are not of God Now if to be of God in this place doth signifie God's Election then the cause of their sinnes hereby is made God 's not electing of them But if this phrase To be of God signifie God's regenerating of them as I thinke it doth then God's not regenerating of them is made the cause of this their disobedience in not hearing God's word 's and indeed the evill of sinne hath noe efficient cause but deficient only as Austine hath delivered long agoe And God is not bound to any either to elect him or regenerate him so that in failing to regenerate mā he doth not deficere or faile in any culpable mā ner now let every indifferent Reader judge whether here be not Dignus vindice nodus a knot worthy to be loosed it will require some worth of learning in him that solves it And is it decent for this Authour to censure a man for a conclusion made by him out of the word of God without shewing the faultinesse either of his interpretation thereof or of his consequence framed therehence So that this Author's wit cunning is more to be cōmended in not specifying the place where Piscator delivers this doctrine then either his learning or his honesty He was loath to raise spirits afterwards to prove unable to lay them Therefore thus I answer in behalfe of Piscator though God her by me made the cause why sōe heare not God's words to wit in as much as he doth not regenerate thē nor give the eies to see nor eares to heare an heart to perceive according to that of Moses Yet he doth not make God any culpable cause neither indeed is he any culpable cause while he failes to performe so gracious a worke towards thē the reason whereof is this He and he alone is a culpable cause who failes in doing that which he ought to do ut God all be it he doth not regenerate a man yet he failes not of doing that which he ought to doe For it is no duty of his to regenerate any man for he is bound to none Now to be the Authour of sinne is not only to be the cause thereof but to be a culpable cause thereof Undoubtedly God could preserve any man from sinne if it pleased him and if he doth not he is nothing faulty Secondly I answere that in true account God is only the cause why our naturall infidelity is not healed our corruption not cured Like as a Physitian may be said to be the cause why such a man continues sicke in as much as he could cure him but will not Soe God could cure the infidelitie of all but will not Only here is the difference the Physitian may be a culpable cause as who is bound to love his neighbour as himselfe but God being bound to none is no culpable cause of man's continuance in sinne and in the hardnesse of his heart albeit he can cure him but will not As for Piscator's saying here mentioned Reprobates are appointed precisely to this double evill to be punished everlastingly and to sinne and therefore to sinne that they may be justly punished Hereing are two things charged upon Piscator 1. That Reprobates are precisely appointed by God to perish everlastingly To this I answer that noe Arminiā that I know denies Reprobates to be appoinby God to everlasting damnation All the question is about the manner of appointing them namely whether this appointment of God proceeds meerly according to his meer pleasure or upon the foresight of sinne We say it proceeds meerly according to the good pleasure of God and not upon the foresight of sinne preceding And this we not only say but prove thus If reprobation proceed upon the foresight of sinne then it were of men's evill workes Now looke upon what grounds the Apostle proves that election is not of good workes upon the same ground it is evident that reprobation is not of evill works for the argumēt for the one is this Before Iacob Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therfore election is not of good works In like manner thus I reason concerning Reprobation Before Iacob and Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said to Rebekah the elder shall serve the younger therefore reprobation is not of evill workes 2. If God doth ordaine any man to damnation upon foresight of sin then this sin foreseen is the cause of the Divine ordinance but sin foreseen cannot be the cause why God ordained man to damnation as I prove thus If it be the cause then either by the necessity of nature or by the ordinance of God not by necessity of nature For undoubtedly God if it pleased him could ordaine to annihilate them for their sinnes instead of punishing them with eternall fire Nor can it be the cause of any such decree by the free ordinance of God For if it were marke what intolerable absurdityes would follow namely this That God did ordaine that upon the foresight of sinne he would ordaine men unto damnation whereby God's eternall ordination is made the object of God's ordination whereas all know that the Objects of God's decrees which are all one with his ordinations are things temporall not things eternall 3. If the foresight of sinne goes before the decree of damnation then the decree of permitting sinne goes before the decree of damning for sin that is the permission of sinne was first in intention and consequently it ought to be last in execution that is First man should be damned for sin and not till afterwards permitted to sinne The second thing charged upon Piscator is this that Reprobates are precisely appointed to sin Now here the crimination grates not upō the manner of being appointed thereunto otherwise a way could be opened for a progresse in infinitum Now why should it be any more a fault in Piscator to say of some that they are appointed to sinne then in Peter to say of some that they are appointed to disobedience or in all the Apostles to professe that all the outrages committed by Herod and Pilate by the Gentiles and people of Israell were such as Gods hand his counsell had before determined to be done or why doth Piscator make God to be the Authour of sinne in this more then Peter and all the Apostles And considering this man's unconscionable carriage in this let the Reader take heed how he suffers himselfe to be gull'd by this Authour and drawne to censure such speeches in Piscator as making God the Authour of sinne when hereby he is drawne ere he is aware to passe the like censure on the Apostles And the
rather then to an other If Scholars of our Universities use any such phrases it is no other then they find in use among School-divines It is true indeed Jesuites oppose the Dominicans in this This Authour sides with the Jesuites but why doth he not take to taske any one chapter in Alvarez on this point to answer to overthrow their grounds which are no other then the very word of God and cleare reason doth justifie And the ground of the Jesuites in opposing is meerely an invention of their own concerning a certaine knowledge of God called a middle knowledge a vile invention and a palpable untruth and controulable of manifest contradiction For they suppose a thing knowable by God as future before God's will hath passed upon it to make it future being in it's own nature meerly possible and consequently cannot passe out of the condition of a thing meerly possible into the condition of a thing future without a cause Now noe cause can be devised hereof with any colour of reason but the will of God For first the cause hereof must be eternall seeing the thing it selfe of the cause whereof we dispute is eternall to wit the fruition of any thing This I say was eternall for it is known with God from all eternity Now there is noe eternall cause to be found but in God alone therefore the cause why things meerly possible in their own nature became future and that from everlasting must be found in God alone Therefore it must either be the will of God or the knowledge of God that did make it future and seing the knowledge of God rather supposeth them to be future then makes them so what remaines but that the will of God must necessarily be the cause hereof Nay consider whether the Jesuites themselves doe not manifest more ingenuity by farre then this boisterous Theologue that thinks to carry all with the blast of his words the resolution of whose arguments generally neither having the word of God for their ground nor any confest principle of reason Whereas not the greatest Angell of God will take upon him such an authoritative manner of discourse For did we grant that God by his Allmighty will did impose any necessity upon our wills Yet Suarez confesseth that so to worke doth neither involve any contradiction nor exceed the Allmighty power of God Whereas we are ready to prove and have already proved that their doctrine of God's concourse without subordination of the second causes to the first implies flat contradiction We say the wills determination of it selfe is the worke of God otherwise faith and love and every gracious act shall not be the worke of God Againe the wills determination of it selfe is no other then the wills operation and this Authour that opposeth us dares not deny the wills opperation to be the worke of God But what School divine can he produce that delivers himselfe in so absurd a manner as to say that God first determines the will and that afterwards the will determines it selfe especially speaking of such actions of the will as are produced by the power of nature The wills determination of it selfe we say is the worke of God moving the creature agreably to the nature thereof that is to be carried necessarily to that which is it's end and appeares to be good in genere convenientis and freely to the meanes which appeare to be good in genere conducentis as fit to pronounce the end intended All confessing Durand excepted that God works the act the question whether he works the act absolutely the will a second agent subordinate unto God as to it's Creatour Or conditionally modo vellimus provided that we will it God the first agent subordinate to the will of the creature This Authour will have it to be wrought by God that is conditionally in dependence upon and expectation of the operation of the creature which we say is most absurd First because thus the first agent is made subordinate to the second agent which is most unaturall Secondly observe a manifest contradiction For the question is about actus volendi the act of willing in man Now if God produce this act upon supposition that man produceth this act then the same act is produced by God upon supposition that it is produced by man If it be produced by man what need is there of God's producing it by way of supplement Thirdly by this meanes the thing is made the condition of it selfe For hereby it is said this act is made upon condition that it doth exist so the selfe same thing shall be before after it selfe 4. Thus man's production of the act shall be noe worke of God which holds off faith and repentance as well as of any naturall act in this Authours opinion Fiftly It is not possible the will can produce the act unlesse God produceth it If then God doth not produce it unlesse the will doth produce it in this case there shall be noe act produced For if I goe not to London unlesse you goe with me nor you goe to London unlesse I goe with you here is no going at all till one saith I say I goe and his resolution carrieth the other with him if the others depend thereupon 6 Whereas to helpe at a dead lift the Jesuiticall doctrine of Scientia media middle knowledge is called in after this manner God foreseing that at such an instant the will of man will produce such an act if God be pleased to concurre and upon this foreknowledâ—e God resolves to concurre This doctrine I have already confounded by shewing the apparent falsity of this supposition For seeing the wills producing such an act at such an instant is a thing merly possible in it's own nature no more future then not future It is impossible that this should passe out of the condition of a thing meerly possible into the conditioÌ„ of a thing future without a cause And noe cause hereof can be but the will of God as I have often proved It followes that the wills producing such an act depends rather upon the will of God to have it produced then on the contrary that Gods producing such an act dependes upon the creatur's will to produce it As for that which followes of the absolute dominion that the will of the creature should have over it's action I presume he meanes independent it sounds more like the voice of the Devill then of a sober Christian Yet it is more then I know that Lucifer himselfe challengeth any such absolute Dominion over his actions unto himselfe If he doth I know noe greater sinne that hee or the creature can be guilty of unlesse in case grosse ignorance doth excuse it To deny God to be the first Agent is to deny his God-head and if hee be primum agens hee must be primum liberum too the first free agent And to make our selves to be prima libera the first free agents what is other
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
of evill for himselfe But by the way I observe how you mistake the opinion of your opposites as when you say that this decree of manifesting Gods mercy or justice is a decree of working an effect in that subject for this is utterly untrue This were to make the decree of salvation of the one and of damnation of the other to be before the decree of creation And although some such thing may be conceived out of a superficiall apprehension of it as proposed by Beza and Piscator yet both in true account of that opinion in generall and mistaking of it in speciall no such thing is avouched Nay whereas your selfe maintaine that the decree of damnation is before the decree of permission of finall impenitency a point no way congruous to your Tenet about massa corrupta you have often read in my writings that I account the decree of damnation in no moment of time to precede the decree of permission of finall impenitency Then the case of Angells is utterly against this unlesse you maintaine the one to be elected upon the foresight of their obedience the other reprobated upon the foresight of their disobedience which I am perswaded you shall not find any Orthodox Divine in the point of mans election to maintaine 3. Conclusio tertia Gods decree to permit sinne is before his decree to manifest either his mercy in pardoning sinne or his justice in punishing sinne because that is a decree de eventu this a doing of something by occasion of that event Resp 1. To your reason here mentioned I have answered before 2. There is no priority or posteriority in intention but onely in respect of finis and media ad finem 3. It is untrue that the former decree is a decree of an event and the latter of doing something by occasion of this event For what is Gods permission the event you meane If so then Gods working grace may be accounted an event also and so Gods decree of salvation upon his working grace shall follow upon his decree of working grace which is manifestly Arminianisme Is the sinne permitted the event First why should you call it an event is it because you conceive it to fall out besides Gods intention Arminius himselfe professeth the contrary The articles of Ireland professe that God from eternity did by his unchangeable counsell ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe your selfe acknowledge that Gods decree of permitting sinne is a decree de eventu your selfe acknowledge that God did foresee that man would sinne in case he did permit him to sinne which is as much as to say stice food did intend that sinne should come to passe by his permission which is 〈…〉 and expresse profession of Austin where he saith Non ergo aliquid fit nisi omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo so that whether things come to passe Deo faciente as good things or Deo sinente as evill things still they came to passe Deo volente as Austin professeth Now this sinne is apparently the cause of the damnation of many thousands for as much as many thousand infants are damned onely for sinne originall And therefore like as upon this sin existent God doth not take an occasion onely but a cause of damning many thousands so if the decree of permitting this be presupposed before the decree of damnation you may say as well that God upon the foresight of this sinne doth not onely take occasion but a cause also of decreeing their damnation And this may be applyed to the reprobation not onely of infants but of all that are damned forasmuch as all that are damned are damned for originall sinne onely here is the difference such reprobates as dye in their infancy are damned onely for originall sinne but others are damned not only for originall sinne but for their actuall sinnes also Againe it is manifest that the decree of permitting sinne originall is no more a decree de eventu and Gods decree to manifest his mercy in pardoning it is a decree of doing something by occasion of that event than Gods decree of permitting all actuall sinnes of his elect from the first to the last is a decree de eventu and Gods decree to manifest his mercy in pardoning actuall sinnes is a decree of working something by occasion of that event and I cannot but wonder this being againe and againe put to your consideration that you doe not take notice of the equipollency of these whence it manifestly followeth that the decree of pardoning sinnes shall presuppose massam corruptam as well with actuall sinnes as sinnes originall Againe if Gods decree of shewing justice in punishing sinne is but a decree of taking occasion of doing something then Gods decree of damnation for mens actuall sinnes is but a decree of taking occasion of doing something and consequently by what reason the decree of punishing sinne presupposeth the decree of permitting sinne originall by the same reason the decree of damnation shall presuppose the decree of permitting not onely sinne originall but all actuall sinnes also By the same reason the decree of salvation is but a decree of doing something upon the occasion of faith repentance and good workes For if sinne deserve not to be accounted a cause moving God to resolve to punish a man with damnation but rather an event by occasion where of he resolves to punish with damnation much lesse shall faith repentance and good workes be accounted a cause moving God to decree to save any man but onely an event by occasion whereof God doth decree some mens salvation Yet looke by what reason the decree of punishing with damnation doth presuppose the decree of permitting sinne by occasion of which event punishment by damnation is decreed by the same reason the decree of salvation doth presuppose the decree of giving faith repentance and good workes by occasion of which events salvation is decreed for why should not faith and good workes be accounted an occasion of the decree of salvation as well as sinnes are the occasion of the decree of damnation 4. The fourth conclusion is this Gods decree to produce the person of Peter is before his decree to manifest his mercy in Peter by the reason aforesaid Thes 8. Resp That eighth Thesis aforesaid made no mention of priority in decree or intention but onely of priority in execution by vertue of Gods decree for the words of that eighth Thesis are these God decreeth first to produce that subject and afterwards to worke such an effect thereupon Not that God did first decree to produce the subject but onely that God did decree first to produce the subject manifesting hereby that your intent is onely to reason from the order of execution and therehence to inferre the like order in intention which is the ordinary course of Arminians at this day And you signifie your meaning to be this in that eighth Thesis though in the issue you faile of
body or the decree of advancing a subject by way of reward doth presuppose his service or the decree of a Patron to present his sonne to a benefice doth presuppose his fitnesse for it or the decree of Solomon to bring Shimei his gray haires unto the grave in bloud did presuppose the offence for which this was brought to passe but rather from these decrees and intentions each Author in his kind proceedeth to bring to passe every thing that is required to the accomplishment of that end which he requires As I prove by instance in every particular 1. I have knowne one that to shew the power of his balme hath wounded his owne flesh and pouring his balme into it hath cured it in the space of twenty foure houres Aske wherefore he wounded his flesh every one seeth that both he wounded it and healed it with his balme to make the vertue of his balme knowne So that his intention of manifesting the vertue of his balme did not presuppose the wound but drew after it both the making of the wound and the pouring of balme into it as the meanes tending to the demonstration of the power of the balme 2. So we have knowne another to take poyson and afterward his cordiall against it both the one and the other joyntly tending to the manifestation of the vertue of his cordiall 3. A King intending to promote a favourite but withall to doe it without envy of the Nobility may resolve to doe it by way of reward which purpose presupposeth not good service but rather hereupon he will imploy him in service as in some honourable Embassage or in the Warres to the end that he may have occasion to advance him upon his service without envy of the Nobles 4. A Patron having a young sonne may entertaine a resolution to bestow a living upon him when time serves This intention doth not presuppose his fitnesse without which he cannot be admitted but because he hath a purpose to preferre him thereunto therefore he will take order to bring him up like a Schollar and send him to the University to make him fit 5. Last of all Solomon you know upon Davids admonition on his death bed entertained an intention to bring Shimei to his grave in bloud yet not for his cursing of David but for a new transgression therefore he takes a course to ensnare him and bids him to build him an house in Jerusalem and not to passe over the Brooke Kidron upon paine of death Now it was not indeed in Solomons power effectually to ensnare him and so certainely to bring upon him the execution of death But this is in the power of God For let him but expose any creature unto temptation and derelinquish him therein without giving him his grace to support him that creature shall certainely fall into sinne otherwise if any creature can keepe himselfe from sinne without Gods grace then Gods grace shall not have the prerogative of being the cause of every good action But this prerogative of Gods grace must and by Gods grace shall be maintained unto the end And upon this foundation the prerogative of his soveraigne power also over his creatures in disposing of them as he thinkes good and making some vessells of mercy and some of wrath which Arminius himselfe professeth he dares not deny to be in the power of God to wit to make vessells of mercy and vessells of wrath and that ex massa nondum condita in his Analysis of the ninth to the Romans But I proceed to the forme of your Syllogisme 1. The reason you say may be laid downe Syllogistically thus 1. God could not intend to pardon any without supposition of that which is necessarily required to make them capable of pardon But sinne is necessarily required to make them capable of pardon therefore God could not intend to pardon any without supposition of sinne 2. God could not intend to punish any without consideration of that which is in justice required to make them punishable But sinne is required in justice to make any person punishable therefore God could not intend to punish any without consideration of sinne Resp 1. In both Syllogismes the Minor we grant the Major we deny as being in effect the very same proposition which is in question and all the evidence it carryeth with it consisteth in the parts which have a shew of an Enthymeme thus 1. Sinne is necessarily prerequired to the pardoning of sinne therefore it is necessarily prerequired to the decree of pardoning sinne 2. Sinne in justice is prerequired unto punishing Ergo 'tis in justice prerequired to the decree of punishing Now this is the very proofe which formerly I laboured to disprove by shewing the inconsequence thereof yet the proposition whereon you rely either must depend upon this proofe or upon none at all But I will proceed with you a little farther upon these Syllogismes you propose 2. Sinne you say and that truly is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon And this generall truth brancheth it selfe into two specialls 1. Sinne originall is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon for sinne originall 2. Sinne actuall is necessarily required to make men capable of pardon for sinne actuall Now because God doth intend to pardon all the sinnes of his elect not onely originall but actuall committed throughout the whole course of his life it followeth that God could not intend to pardon these actuall sinnes without the presupposition of them 3. By the same reason of yours I dispute thus 1. God could not intend to bestow salvation upon any man by way of reward without supposition of that which is necessarily required to make him capable of reward But the obedience of faith repentance and good workes is necessarily required to make a man capable of reward Ergo God could not intend to bestow salvation on any man by way of reward without supposition of faith repentance and good workes 2. As God cannot intend to punish any without consideration of that which in justice is required to make him punishable so God cannot intend to punish any in such a degree without that which is required in justice to make him punishable in such a degree Now not onely sinne originall but all actuall sinnes of every Reprobate together with their finall impenitency therein is required in justice to make every one of them punishable in such a degree Ergo could not God intend to punish any Reprobate in such a degree without consideration of all their actuall sins And as mens actuall sinnes are the meritorious causes of their damnation so the consideration of them shall be the meritorious cause of their reprobation or at least of that decree whereby God doth decree to inflict damnation upon them in such a degree And by just proportion of reason like as faith repentance and good workes are the disposing causes unto salvation so the consideration of faith repentance and good workes shall be the
so Gods grace preserved him from such excesse but that the Ministers Tiberius set about them did more provoke them by exasperating courses then God did in like manner provoke Ionah it doth not appeare but had Ionah hereupon broken forth into blasphemies had Ionah's sinne been excusable or Gods course blameable Revel 16. 21. we read of a great hayle that fell upon the men like Talents out of heaven and men blaspheamed God because of the plague of the hayle for the plague thereof was exceeding great And Isai 8. 21. The Lord prophecyeth that He that is afflicted and famished shall goe to and fro and when he shall be hungry he shall even fret himselfe and curse his King and his Gods and look upward such plagues are the work of God for there is no evill in the citty but the Lord hath done it Amos 3. But let them look unto it that thereupon take occasion to blaspheme And Tentatio probationis was never yet that I know denyed unto God to try whether they will blaspheme God or no. To this end Satan desired to have an hand on Job yet not so much to try whether he would blaspheme or no but being confident he should bring him to blaspheme Job 1. 11. stretch out now thine hand and touch all that he hath and he will curse thee to thy face The Lord gave him leave and Job acknowledgeth the Lords hand in all that Satan did saying The Lord gave and the Lord takes away yet in all this Job sinned not nor charged God foolishly Satan desires yet farther liberty saying skin for skin yea all that a man hath will he give for his life But put forth thy hand now and touch his bone and his flesh and he will curse thee to thy face And the Lord said unto Satan Behold he is in thy hand but save his life So went Satan forth from the presence of the Lord and smote Job with sore boyles from the sole of his foot unto his crowne and he took him a potshard to scrape himselfe withall and he sate down among the ashes Then said his Wife unto him Doest thou yet continue in thy integrity Curse God and dye She manifested the inward corruption of her irreligious heart Job might have brought her to a forme of godlines by his pious courses in his family but litle power of godlinesse doth appeare upon her For as Solomon saith If thou faint in the day of adversity thy strength is small It seems her heart was sowred with Atheisme thinking the world was governed by chance rather then by divine providence and consequently it was all one whether a man did blesse God or curse God and a madnesse to make a conscience of walking in integrity and that in Iobs case at this time whether he did blesse God he must dye or whether he did curse God he could but dye and better it was for him thus impoverished thus afflicted to dye then to live as for the powers of the world to come it seems she never had but a tast of them and that tast never produced any true faith in her concerning them Here was a sore temptation the very gates of hell playing upon him with their greatest Ordinance to batter if it were possible his shield of faith But what is Iobs answer Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh What shall we receive good at the hand of God and shall we not receive evill In all this did not Iob sin with his lips The worke of Satan in the impoverishing of Iobs estate and afflicting his person cannot be denied to be Gods work As for the work of his wife why might not that be the work of God as well as the work of Satan For did not Satan sin in all this As our Saviour saith that he was a murtherer from the beginning and as S t Peter saith The devill goes about like a roring Lyon seeking whom he may devoure so who can make doubt but these courses practised against Iob were fruits of his murthering and devouring disposition And all sides now a daies confesse that the act of the most flagitious sin committed by man or Angell is the work of God in the way of a principall efficient cause as well as it is the work of the creature And as for the sinfulnesse of the act either of the Devill or his Wife that was not it which did or could hurt Iob but the works wrought by Satan the temptation atheisticall proposed by his Wife this was the greatest danger in the consideration thereof to corrupt his soule for that is it alone that workes upon the will to incline it And as for their sinning herein that proceeded from the want of Gods feare according to that of Abraham Genes 20. 10. I said surely the feare of God is not in this place therefore they will slay me for my Wives sake And albeit God engageth himselfe towards some for the putting of his feare in their hearts that they shall never depart away from him Ierim 36. 40. yet he hath not engaged himselfe thus farre towards all For the Apostle plainly professeth that He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. and hardning we know is denying the feare of God either as touching the habituall infusion thereof or as touching the actuall excitation thereof after it is infused Yet I deny not but obduration and excaecation are sometimes promiscuously used the one for the other because of the strict conjunction that is betwixt them And as touching the particular act of Convitiation Austin spares not to professe that even when it is committed by man it is brought forth by God out of his secret providence lib. 9. Confess cap. 8. Quid egisti Deus meus unde curasti unde sanasti nonne protulisti durum acutum ex alterâ animâ convitium tanquam medicinale ferrum ex occultis provisionibus tuis uno ictu putredinem illam praecidisti And whereas Bellarmine endeavoureth to blast the evidence of this place giving testimony unto Gods secret providence in evill I have endeavoured to shew the vanity of his discourse in my Vind. Grat. Dei lib. 2. Crim. 3. digress 2. cap. 13. And in what congruity can it be said that God bid Shimei to curse David but that in the same analogy of faith it may be said that God bid Iobes Wife in this manner to tempt him And which of the two was the greatest provocation Tiberius his Ministers Provocation of Drusus and Nero or Shimei's provocation of David rayling on him to his face the Subject blaspheaming his Prince undoubtedly the provocation was nothing inferior only here was the difference Tiberius gave such commandment to his Ministers so to provoke Drusus and Nero God gave no such commandement in proper speech unto Shimei but rather commanded the contrary in his law Thou shalt not speak evill of the ruler of thy people But Gods secret providence whereby he
that is pleasing in his sight Heb. 13. 20. to cause us to walk in his statutes and judgements and to doe them Ezech. 36. 28. yea to keep us from presumptious sins and that they get not the dominion over us Psal 19. 14. yea to deliver us from every evill work 2 Timoth. 4. 18. But perhaps some may say Our doctrine is that God willeth sin to be committed for which men may and shall be punished like as Tiberius would the Virgins should be defloured that they might be strangled And I answer that Arminius himselfe professeth that Deus voluit Achabum mensuram scelerum suorum implere God would have Ahab fill up the measure of his sinne that he might be condignely punished And why may we not say as well that God would have Tiberius to fill up the measure of his sinnes And yet like as Tiberius would have the Virgins to be defloured that they might be strangled so Ahab would have Naboth accused of blasphemy that he might be condemned for it and so put to death and stoned and all these things were done under colour of Religion Yet Arminius in reference to these very courses spares not to professe that God would have Ahab to fill up the measure of his sinnes yet doth not Bertius upbraid him for defaming God with imputing cruelty unto him Againe the same Arminius professeth that in their ignominious handling of Christ God would have the Jewes progredi quousque progressi sunt proceed so farre as they did proceed And was it not Gods will in like manner that the Gentiles should proceed as farre as they did in the same businesse Now we know full well by the story Evangelical how farre they went in their mischievous courses against the Son of God For Judas betrayed him and the high Priests both hired Judas hereunto and suborned false witnesses against him and both the Herodians and Souldiers mocked him and the people urged Pilate to crucify him and to dismisse 〈◊〉 and Pilate yeelded to the peoples desire took order to have him first scourged then crucified And if it may be truely and piously said that in these ignominious usages of the Son of God they went as farre as God would have them to goe why may it not with as great truth and piety be avouched that Tiberius also in these his barbarous courses went as farre as God would have him Neither doth Arminius give himselfe to qualify the harshnesse of these his affirmations We say that whatsoever comes to passe it is Gods will it should come to passe as Austin expresly professeth Enchir. cap. 95. Nec aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit and the Articles of Ireland Artic. 11. professe the same But withall we explicate it as Austin dothin the words following by adding the different manner how they shall come to passe by the will of God according to the different condition of things that come to passe namely good or evill thus Vult fieri but how vel sinendo ut fiat to wit in case they are evill vel ipse faciendo to wit in case they are good So then good things God will have come to passe by his effection evill things only by his permission And Bellarmine opposing our Divines to the uttermost of his power in this particular being convicted in conscience by the evidence of truth is driven to confesse Bonum esse ut malum fiat Deo permittente It is good that evill should come to passe by Gods permission or Gods permitting it Tiberius willed that the Virgins should be defloured and impiously he willed it God willed that Davids Concubines should be defloured and holily he willed it neither is he delighted with impurity For the Scripture attributes this unto God I will give thy Wives unto thy Neighbour and he shall lye with them in the sight of all Israel and before the sunne And this constupration of Davids Concubines served for the chastising of David as Arminius professeth Inserviit castigando Davidi omnes paenae habent Deum authorem All punishments have God for their author they are the words of the same Arminius It was impiety and cruelty in Tiberius to cause the Virgins to be defloured and strangled But what Christian dares to impute impiety or cruelty unto God for causing the Children of the Sodomites some in their Mothers wombe some hanging upon their Mothers breasts to be consumed with fire and brimstone It was impiety and cruelty in Tiberius to will the deflouring of those Virgins that they might be strangled But Arminius thought it neither impiety nor cruelty for God to will that Ahab should fill up the measure of his sinne that so he might accumulate unto himselfe wrath in the day of wrath for if he had I presume he would not have ascribed any such will unto God as he doth in expresse termes Although he well knew the vast difference between the power of man and the power of God in executing vengeance the ones power extending only to the execution of vengeance temporall but Gods power extends to the execution of vengeance eternall Now I find a story immediatly following this very story alleadged by this Author out of Suetonius expressing the cruelty of Tiberius in a farther degree as not contented with the death of them whom he would destroy and therefore he would keep them alive to torment them Mori volentibus vis adhibita vivendi when they desired to dye he caused them to live by force Nam mortem adeò leve supplicium putabat ut cum audisset unum è reis anticipasse eam exclamaverit Carnutius me evasit For he accounted death so light a punishment that when he heard one of the condemned persons to have anticipated it he cryed out Carnutius hath escaped me for that was the condemned persons name And when he took notice of them that were inward when one desired to suffer betimes he answered him Nondum tecum in gratiam redii I doe not as yet beare these so much good will Now why may not some Atheisticall person track the steps of this Author and in this particular exaggerate the hainousnesse of Gods holy courses as savouring of cruelty beyond all example beyond the cruelty of Tiberius because he holds delinquent creatures upon the rack of eternall torment in hell fire For certain vindicative courses in Tiberius inferior unto these are accounted abominable cruell and impious how much more if this Authors argumentation be of force those courses which the word of God hath informed us to be the courses divine infinitely beyond the courses of Tiberius in the way of severity and rigour As for the power of God in producing sinne we acknowledge none Above 1200 years agoe it was delivered by Austin that sinne hath no efficient cause but deficient only But when the creature sinneth he sinneth in doing that he ought not to doe or in doing what he doth not in that manner he ought to doe or in not doing what he
naturall and carnall men and therein they doe abstaine from the committing of it freely And yet we say that even in abstaining from these acts they doe not abstaine from sinne for as much as they doe not abstaine from them in a gracious manner and all by reason of that originall corruption which remaines uncured in them untill such time as God who hath mercy on whom he will is pleased to cure it by the grace of regeneration 3. But because I imagine this Author le ts fly at randome and keeps not himselfe to the precise genius of the Tenent by him impugned but rather aimeth at our doctrine concerning providence divine and the decree of God according whereunto we willing professe with Austin that Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit Enchir. 95. Therefore I answere in the third Place That the necessity following upon this will of God is nothing prejudiciall to the liberty or contingency of second agents in their severall operations Although I am not ignorant that now a daies it is the common and glorious course of our Adversaries very confidently to presume and presuppose that upon the will of God passing upon the action of the creature there followeth a necessity standing in flat opposition to the liberty of rationall agents and no marvail for sic factitavit Hercules Arminius the great Champion of their cause his learning served him to doe so before them As if the contumelious usages of our Saviour by Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and people of Israel were not performed freely but by meer necessity opposite to liberty For it cannot be denied but that all these were gathered together against the holy sonne of God to doe what Gods hand and Gods counsel had predestinated to be done Acts 4. 28. And in like sort they that through disobedience stumbled at the word of God did not freely disobey the Word because Peter professeth of them in expresse termes that Hereunto they were ordained And after the same manner it is to be conceived of the Kings that gave their Kingdomes to the Beast namely that they did it not freely in as much as the Holy Ghost saith that God put into their hearts to fulfill his will and to consent and give their Kingdome to the Beast Yet the Church of Ireland in their Articles set forth by as good Authority as the Articles of the Church of England Art 11. having professed that God from all eternity did by his unchangeable counsel ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe to prevent such like objections as this Author fashioneth forthwith adde Yet so as thereby no violence is offered to the willes of reasonable creatures and neither the liberty nor the contingency of second causes is taken away but established rather And Austin in his Book De Grat. Liber Arbitr where he speaks as freely of Gods effectuall Providence working in evill as no where more in so much as our Adversaries take great exceptions against his speeches such as formerly delivered and that in expresse termes His main drift notwithstanding and scope in that Book is to prove that notwithstanding the divine operation in working the motion of the creature as he thinks good yet is the creature never a whit the lesse free in its own operation And indeed where grace is wanting there is too much will rather then too little unto that which is evill according to that he writes also elsewhere Libertas sine gratia non est libertas sed contumacia And if Gods operation prejudiceth not the liberty of the creature much lesse the will of God For though not any thing comes to passe unlesse God willeth it whether it be good or evill yet with this difference as Austin in the same place professeth He will have that which is good come to passe by the effecting of it but evill only by his permitting of it Non aliquid fit nisi Omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo But though Austin and the Church of Ireland yea and the Word of God teacheth this yet the Tragaedian as this Author saith could see the contrary that is perceive the evidence of the contrary which none of these saw And is not this a pretty Comaedy that a Tragaedian and Zeno's servant must be brought in and that in a confidentiary supposition to out face not Divines only both antient and late but the very word of God For it is as clear forsooth that what comes to passe by the will of God and by the effectuall operation of God doth not come to passe freely and consequently that the doctrine which maintaines that evill comes to passe by the will of God as the crucifying of Christ by the predestination of God or by the operation of God as the Rent of the ten Tribes from the two and the hardning of Pharaoh's heart so as not to let Israel goe God professeth to be his work takes away all conscience of sinne All this I say is as cleare if we believe this Author as that Seneca's Tragaedies are the Oracles of God And I pray consider must it not take away as well all conscience of righteousnesse whether of faith or of repentance or of obedience unlesse we deny faith to be the gift of God repentance to be the gift of God unles we deny that God is he Who makes us perfect to every good work working in us that which is pleasing in his sight that God is he that putteth his own spirit in us and causeth us to walke in his statutes and to keep his judgements and doe them Yet what doth Seneca speak of the divine will or divine operation Did the Tragaedian under the terme of Fate denote the divine decree or the divine administration of things which is plentifully revealed to us in the word of God Austin I am sure thought otherwise in more places then one in Psalm 31. on these words Pronunciabo adversum me He blames those who when they are found in their sinnes say Fatum mihi fecit stellae meae fecêrunt But saith he Quid est fatum Quae sunt stellae certè istae quas in Coelo conspicimus Qui eas fecit Deus Quis eas ordinavit Deus ergo vides quod voluisti dicere Deus fecit ut peccarem Then he tells of others who said that Mars facit Homicidam Venus Adulterum So that Fatum with them were second causes which we all know in their operations doe both work by necessity of nature and have no power to maintain the free will of man and in Psalm 91. Quaeris ab illo quid sit Fatum dicit stellae malae Quaeris ab illo quis fecit stellas quis ordinavit stellas non habet quid tibi respondeat nisi Deus It 's true indeed the Pelagians did object the Stoicall Fate unto Austin as if his doctrine favoured of it and what doth he answer thereunto Nec
cause in man any way moving him either in its own nature or by divine constitution moving him to bestow this grace on any So the Apostle 2 Timoth. 1. 9. God hath saved us and called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his own purpose and grace And indeed we being all found dead in sinne what could be found in one to move God to bestow the life of faith and repentance upon him more then upon another And if any such thing were found in man moving God hereunto then should grace be bestowed according unto works that is in the Fathers phraise as Bellarmine acknowledgeth according unto merits which was condemned 1200 years agoe in the Synod of Palestine and Pelagius himselfe was driven to subscribe unto it otherwise they had condemned him also But as touching the conferring of glory God doth not bestow this on whom he will finding men equall without any moving cause thereunto even in man For though there be no moving cause hereunto in man of its own nature yet there is to be found a moving cause in man by constitution divine whereby God is as it were moved to bestow solvation on some and not on others For God hath made a gracious promise that whosoever beleeveth and repenteth and continueth in faith and repentance unto death shall be saved and whosoever beleeveth not and repenteth not shall be damned So then though men are equall in originall sinne and in naturall corruption and God bestowes faith and repentance on whom of them he will curing their corruption in whom he will yet when he comes to the conferring of glory men are not found equall in morall condition and accordingly God cannot be said on like manner to bestow glory solvation on whō he will For he hath tyed himselfe by his own constitution to bestow solvation on none but such as dye in thestate of grace Yet I confes some say that God bestows solvation on whom he will in as much as he is the author of their faith repentance bestows these graces on whō he will yet certainly there is a different manner in the use of this phraise of bestowing this or that on whom he will For when God bestowes faith and repentance he findes them on whom he will bestow it no better then others But when he comes to the bestowing of glory he findes them on whom he bestowes that farre better them others Now we come to the things decreed in reprobation and these are two 1. The denyall of the grace of regeneration that is of the grace of faith and repentance whereby mans naturall infidelity and impenitency is cured 2. The denyall of glory and the inflicting of damnation The first of these to wit the denyall of grace mentioned is made to whom he will And it must needs be so in ease God gives this grace to whom he will And the Apostle professeth that as God hath mercy on whom he will so he hardneth whom he will And as God denies this grace to whom he will so did he decree to deny it to whom he will Yet there is a difference considerable For albeit God hardneth whom he will by denying unto them the grace of faith and repentance yet notwithstanding like as it is just with God to inflict damnation upon them for that sinne whether originall or actuall wherein he findes them when the ministry of the word is afforded them so likewise it cannot be denied to be iust with God to leave their infidelity and impenitency wherein he finds them uncured But yet because God hath not made any such constitution namely that whosoever is found in infidelity and impenitency shall be so left and abandoned by him therefore he is properly said as to cure it in whom he will so to leave it uncured in whom he will finding them all equall in originall sinne and consequently lying equally in this their naturall infidelity and impenitencv So wee may iustly say there is no cause at all in man of this difference to wit why God cures infidelity impenitency in one and not in another but it is the meer pleasure of God that is the cause of this difference And if any list to contend hereabouts we shall be willing to entertaine him and conferre our strength of argumentation on this point 2. But as touching the denyall of glory and inflicting of damnation which is the second thing decreed in reprobation there is alwaies found a cause motive yea and meritorious hereof to wit both of the denyall of the one inflicting of the other And God doth not proceed herein according to the meer pleasure of his will that by reason of his own constitution having ordained that whosoever continueth finally in infidelity in profane courses and impenitency shall be damned And albeit on the other side it may be said in some sence as formerly I have shewed that God saves whom he will in as much as he is the author of faith which he bestowes on whom he will yet in no congruous sence can he be said to damne whom he will for as much as he is not the author of sinne as he is the author of faith For every good thing he workes but sinne and the evill thereof he only permits not causeth it And lastly as God doth not damne whom he will but those only whom he finds finally to have persevered in sinne without repentance so neither did he decree to damne or reprobate to damnation whom he will but only those who should be found finally to persevere in sinne without repentance Now let us apply this to the Article we have in hand which is this The moving cause of reprobation is the only will of God and not the sinne of man originall or actuall and for the explication hereof according to that which hath been formerly delivered We say that reprobation doth signify either a purpose of denying grace as above mentioned or a purpose of inflicting damnation And each may be considered either as touching the act of Gods decree or as touching the things decreed We shew how the Article holds or holds not being differently accommodated 1. As touching the things decreed 1. As touching the deniall of grace We say That God decreed of his meere good pleasure to deny unto some the grace of faith and repentance for the curing of that naturall infidelity and impenitency which is found in all without any motive cause hereunto found in one more then in another 2. As touching the inflicting of Damnation We say That God decreed to inflict damnation on some not of his meer pleasure but meerly for their finall perseverance in sinne without repentance 2. As touching the very act of Gods decree We say Nothing in man could be the cause hereof but the meer pleasure of God as Aquinas professeth it a mad thing to devise in man a cause of divine predestination as touching the act of God predestinating as I have
of God is it a Christian course to renounce it or to question the integrity of it because he finds no footing in Antiquity for it What then shall become of the faith of Laicks and such as are unlearned Must the writings of the Fathers be translated into all vulgar Languages and the unlearned addict themselves to the study of them least otherwise their faith prove a wavering faith for want of finding Antiquity to favour it Belike the writings of the Prophets and Apostles are no part of Antiquity in this Authors more mature judgement But if formerly the doctrine of absolute reprobation were received upon the evidence of Gods word as it is fit the faith of every Christian should be grounded thereupon especially the faith of a Divine called to be a Teacher of others I should think there were no just cause of alteration but upon discovery of the errour of those grounds whereupon formerly it was builded and the discovery hereof alone were chiefly to the present purpose namely to shew just cause of change of mind alteration of judgement but no such course doe I find taken here These motives and reasons here proposed may carry a shew of reason why a man being yet to chuse his faith in these particulars possessed with neither way but indifferent might preferre one way before another one opinion before another but nothing sufficient to justify a change unlesse the weaknesse of former grounds be laid open For it may be that the former grounds might be such as upon due comparison would be found to overweigh these pretences For upon view that I have taken of the discourse following I find not one argument drawn from those places of Scripture that treat of election and reprobation these I find are purposely declined as so many rocks as if the Author feared to make shipwrack of his errours pardon my boldnesse in so naming them Austin is my precedent in this saying Hoc scio contra istam praedestinationem quam secundum scripturas defendimus neminem nisi errando disputare posse but in the mean time while he fears to make shipwrack of his errours let him take heed least he make shipwrack of a good conscience But proceed we with him about the inquiry what footing this doctrine finds in Antiquity He saith he cannot find it but it is more then I find that ever he made any convenient search after it his whole discourse hereupon is of so hungry a nature The absolutenesse of election and reprobation we conclude in Christian reason from Gods absolute carriage in giving and denying grace understanding thereby the grace of regeneration Now the absolutenesse herein as we suppose consists in bestowing this grace on some and denying it to others according to the meer pleasure of the Lords will Now hath not the Apostle more ancient then all the Antiquity he speaketh of professed in expresse termes that God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth What need we seek farther amongst the Ancients for the iustification of this And that mercy here is meant such a mercy in bestowing faith on some which is denied to others in converting the wills of some unto good when others are not converted I could prove by variety of places out of Austin whose authority in this case is farre more worthy then all the authority this Author produceth Neither is this the voyce of Austin only but of Ambrose also in that famous saying of his Quem vult religiosum facit so much magnified by Austin And not Ambrose alone but Nazianzen also and Cyprian are alleaged by him as concurring with him in the foundation of the doctrine of predestination which he makes to be the freedome of Gods grace in converting whom he will And which is farre more then this yea farre more then all that can be produced to the contrary by the very Prayers of the Church every where in use he iustifies the generall concurrence in that which he accounts the foundation of predestination As when their common course was to pray unto God that he would be pleased to convert unto the faith of Christ the hearts of Heathens and wherein did this conversion consist but in giving them faith and repentance manifestly giving us to understand thereby that the whole Catholique Church did concurre in this Article of Faith that it was in the power of God according to his free grace to convert whom he would unto the faith of Christ and consequently not to convert whom he would For if there were any cause on mans part why he doth not convert some converting others then there were also on mans part a cause why God doth convert some not converting others and consequently grace should be given according unto works that is in the phrase of the Ancients Gratiam dari secundum merita as Bellarmine acknowledgeth which was ever accounted expresse Pelagianisme and was as expressely condemned in the Councel of Palestina above 1200 years agoe and Pelagius himselfe was driven to subscribe unto it by shamefull dissimulation so to prevent Anathematization of his own person But the upper way saith this Author was never taught or approved by any of the Fathers for 600 years Here breaks forth another reason of this Authors or his that directed him cunning carriage in distinguishing the two waies of our Divines in maintaining the absolutenesse of election and reprobation to wit that in the course of his discourse he might serve his turne with both and where Antiquity served not his turne against the one yet might it serve his turne as he thought against the other But the truth is there was no such question at all ventilated in those daies as touching the obiect of predestination no nor in Austins neither nor many hundred years after that I know And no marvell For it concernes the ordering of Gods decree aright which is meerly Logicall as I have shewed in my Vind. Grat. Dei It s true that S t Austin doth usually accommodate that of S t Paul Rom. 9. 21. concerning the Masse unto mankind considered in Massa damnata as he commonly calls it that is in the corrupt Masse but not alwaies but sometimes he speaks of it and accommodates it cleerely unto the Masse of mankind uncorrupt yea as yet not created as there I have shewed And as for the right ordering of Gods decrees and the right stating of the object of predestination and reprobation We desire no better nor other ground then that of the Apostle God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth that is he cures infidelity and hardnes of heart in whom he will by bestowing faith and repentance upon them and leaves it uncured in whom he will by denying faith and repentance unto them And as for the rigour of this Tenent as it is commonly accounted of making the Masse of mankind not created the object of predestination I have already shewed the vanity of that
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
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
have I received this from three severall hands of Arminians each giving the same interpretation of it as if it were called a strange work because it is alienum a naturâ Dei I know none but Papists doe justify them in this interpretation in my judgement a most unreasonable exposition the Lord taking unto himselfe the execution of judgement as his peculiar saying vengeance is mine and I will repay And Magistrates are but Gods Ministers for this And he professeth his delight in this as well as in the execution of mercy It is true he doth not inflict judgement without cause for that were not a work of judgement in proper speech but of power and absolutenesse rather as in turning a holy and innocent creature into nothing And in that respect he is said not to afflict willingly sinne alwaies deserving it Mercy is of another nature and supposeth free grace though I find little or no notice this Author takes of this throughout his discourse Neither doe I find that he or any Arminian acknowledge that the change of a mans heart is wrought in a man of the meere grace of God without any motive cause in the creature Neither doe all Papists concurre in this interpretation for Lyra and Burgensis are together by the eares hereabouts and our Divines as Junius and Piscator doe render it opus insolens terribile an unusuall and terrible judgement interpreting it of bringing the Babylonians upon them so strange a worke that they should wonder at it And as Moses foretold that God should bring upon them Wonderfull judgements Deut. 28. So the Prophet Abakuk sets it forth in like manner Abak 1. 5. Behold among the Heathen and regard and wonder and marvaile for I will worke a worke in your daies you will not believe it though it be told you For loe I raise up the Caldeans that bitter and furious nation which shall goe upon the breadth of the Land to possesse the dwelling places that are not theirs And Jer. 19. 3. Behold I will bring a plague upon this place which whosoever heareth his eares shall â—ingle For seeing Gods lawes are strange things unto them Hos 8. 12. God would bring such judgements upon them that should be as strange unto them And in the same phrase it is said that destruction is to the wicked and strange punishment to the workers of iniquity Job 31. 3. Yet be this granted him it is nothing to the purpose For be it never so deere unto God yet if he restraineth his chiefe mercy which consists in changing the heart whereof this Author seems unwilling to take any distinct notice only to the Elect called accordingly in Scripture vessells of mercy in distinction from vessells of wrath which are the Reprobates this nothing prejudiceth the absolutenesse of reprobation And as for the frequent exercise thereof we read Zeph. 3. 5. That every morning God bringeth his judgements to light and as for the mercy which consists in regenerating man which alone is to the present purpose it is apparent that it is farre lesse frequently shewed then the contrary judgement in obduration And certainly the vessells of mercy are by farre fewer then the vessells of wrath and as for temporall mercies the more frequent they are the worse where the spirit of regeneration is wanting through the corruption of man that makes him thereupon the more obdurate The vanity of the next as touching the amplitude of the objects whereto mercy is extended though this alone is to the present purpose I have already sufficiently discovered it being apparent that in Scripture phrase only the Elect are counted vessells of mercy and all the rest vessells of wrath As there be examples of Gods long suffering and patience so we have fearfull examples of the suddainesse of Gods judgements taking Men and Women away in the very act of sinne Thus the Israelites in the Wildernesse when the flesh of Quailes was in their mouth the heavy wrath of God came upon them and sent them to the graves of lust Zimri and Cozbi perished in their incestuous act and gave up both lust and ghost together Balshazzar a King cut off in his drunken revells to make good the Prophecy of Isaiah The night of my pleasures hath he turned into feare unto me And in like manner the wrath of God seazed upon Herod in his pride But above all this appears in Gods dealings with his Angells who sinned once and fell for ever without all hope of recovery And as for Gods sparing a man in case God gives not repentance what will be the issue but filling up of the measure of their sinnes For to speak in Austins language Contra Julian Pelag. lib. 5. cap. 4. Quantamlibet praebuerit patientiam nisi Deus dederit quis agit paenitentiam Now the case is cleare God gives repentance to a very few who are in Scripture called vessells of mercy which nothing at all prejudiceth the absolutenesse of reprobation 5. Of the riches of Gods mercies to his children we nothing doubt but what doth this prejudice the absolutenesse of reprobating those whom he never meaneth to make his children But here it is to be suspected that this Author accounts all and every one the children of God for forthwith he confounds this notion with the notion of creatures quite contrary to the most generall current of Scripture not of the New Testament only which teacheth us that we are the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus Gal. 3. and if children then heires even heirs of God and heirs annext with Christ Rom. 8. But of the old Testament also Gen. 6 2. The sonnes of God saw the daughters of men that they were faire c. Exod. 4. 22. Thou shalt say to Pharaoh thus saith thè Lord Israel is my Sonne my first borne wherefore I say let my Sonne goe that he may serve me if thou refuse to let him goe behold I will visit thy Sonne even thy first borne Deut. 14. 1. Ye are the children of the Lord your God 2. Thou art an holy people to the Lord thy God and the Lord hath chosen thee to be a precious people to himselfe above all the people that are upon the earth That of the Hen though we give him liberty to amplify her naturall affections as one of the most affectionate Females among unreasonable creatures yet doth it nothing profit him for it represents Gods love appropriated to his Children which nothing prejudiceth the absolutenesse of his power reprobating others Nay rather as it justifies his absolutenesse in electing them if we consider the meere grace of God to have made the difference as the Scripture sheweth Deut. 7. 7. The Lord loved you because he loved you and Deut. 9. at large he beats them out of all conceit of any righteousnesse in them moving the Lord to plant them in the Land of Canaan so by consequent it justifies the Doctrine of absolute reprobation also for as much as the Apostle
repentance on whom he will because he finds all equall in naturall corruption and no difference in any whereby to move God to bestow grace on him rather then on another The case is not alike when God comes to bestow salvation and inflict damnation for some he finds dying in sinnes others dying in the Lord yet we deny not but by power absolute and secluding the determination of his own will he could annihilate the righteous as well as the wicked In like sort the whole course of nature depends meerely upon the pleasure of God yet we say it is naturall for a Leprous person to beget a Leprous person and so as naturall it is for that which is borne of the flesh to be flesh though each depends upon the constitution of God For albeit Adam lost the spirit of God by his transgression and all supernaturall graces wherewith he was endued yet like as God by regeneration of his meere pleasure restored them afterwards to Adam and in due time doth restore them to every one of his Elect so in their very conception if it pleased God he could for Christs sake infuse them notwithstanding the sinne of Adam and consequently it is the free act of God in refusing after this manner to deale with them Yet this nothing hinders but that the propagation of spirituall corruption unto all Adams posterity may be as naturall as the propagation of any hereditary disease from the Father to the child and over and above that it is not in the way of meer pleasure but in the way of justice for the sinne of Adam which was the sinne of our nature bereaving him of that originall righteousnesse wherein he was â—reated and causing all mankind to be 1. Derived from him whereas he could have otherwise provided 2. And that from Adam after his nature was corrupt with sinne whereas he could have derived posterity from him before his fall had it pleased him And therefore I approve the second Canon of the Synod of Dort whereunto our English Divines with many others subscribed where they professe that the corruption derived from Adam to his posterity was per vitiosae naturae propagationem justo Dei iudicio derivata This I take to be much different from saying Adams sinne is made ours by meer pleasure or by imputation only So the fifteenth Article in the confession Ecclesiarum Belgicarum runs thus Credimus Adami in obedientiâ peccatum originis in totum genus humanum diffusum esse quod est totius naturae corruptio vitium haereditarium quo ipsi infantes in matris suae utero polluti sunt quodque veluti radix omne peccatorum genus in homine producit ideoque ita foedum execrabile est coram Deo ut ad generis humani condemnationem sufficiat Our Brittain Divines in their second Thesis upon the third and fourth Articles explicate themselves concerning the condition of originall sinne in this manner Lapsae voluntati inest non tantum peccandi possibilitas sed etiam praeceps ad peccandum inclinatio Nec aliter se potest res habere in homine corrupto nondum per divinam justitiam restaurato cùm ea sit natura voluntatis ut nuda manere nequeat sed ab uno cui adhaeserat objecto excidens aliud quaerat quod cupidè amplectatur ideo per spontaneam defectionem habitualiter adversa a Deo creatore in creaturam effraeni impetu fertur ac cum ea libidinose ac turpiter fornicatur semper avida fruendi utendis ac vetita moliendi ac patrandi Quid mirum ergo si talis voluntas sit Diaboli maneipium I find indeed in Corvinus such a profession of his namely that ex puro Dei arbitrio qui Adami peccatum nobis imputare voluit etiam in nos reatus derivatus est And Walaeus in answer unto him writes thus Nec quinto illo ad Rom. Capite ad quod nos hic Corvinus remittit quicquam tale dicitur aut innuitur nempe quod ex mero Dei arbittio pendeat haec primi peccati imputatio 2. The Second thing he puts upon our Divines is That God hath determined for that sinne to cast away the farre greater part of mankind for ever and so they make God to doe that by two acts the one accompanying the other which the other say he did by one To which I answer First that if they say that God doth no more by two acts then the other say God did by one seeing I have proved that the other doe no way maintain that God doth punish the righteous with the wicked which is his immodest and unshamefac't crimination no nor doe they maintain that God determined to damne any but for sinne and which is more then that supposing humanum genus nondum conditum to be the object of reprobation yet doth it not follow that in any moment of nature the decree of damnation is before the consideration of sinne surely neither will it follow by the Sublapsarian Doctrine that God doth not decree to punish any man with damnation but for those sinnes wherein he dyeth unrepented of much lesse that God doth punish the righteous with the wicked which is the crimination of this Author proposed I doubt against his own conscience T is true some perish only in originall sinne and that justly for if they be borne children of wrath is it strange if they dye children of wrath And is it not just with God to inflict eternall death on them whom this Author professeth to be guilty of eternall death only he saith that God of his meer pleasure makes them guilty of eternall death That is his saying not ours For though we say originall sinne makes a man guilty of eternall death by the free constitution of God yet we say not that this free constitution of God was made of his meer pleasure but justo Dei judicio like as whosoever believes not shall be damned here damnation is by the free constitution of God made the portion of unbelievers but dares this Author inferre herehence that it is not made so justo Dei judicio indeed God gives grace according to the meere pleasure of his will but no wise man will say that he damnes men according to the meere pleasure of his will for this phrase implies that there is no cause thereof on mans part And indeed there is no cause on mans part why God should give him grace but there is cause enough on mans part why God should inflict damnation on him and yet this work of God though just is never a whit the lesse free So in damning for originall sinne only though Gods constitution hereof be just yet is it never a whit the lesse free and though it be free yet it is never a whit the lesse just And like as damnation is inflicted on finall impenitents sola Dei constitutione only by vertue of this constitution Divine whosoever repents not of his sinne shall be
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
all causes meritorious If it be farther said that not so much the foresight of sin as to speak more properly sinne foreseen is the cause of reprobation I reply against it in this manner sinne foreseen doth suppose Gods decree to permit sinne and consequently if sinne foreseene be before reprobation then also the decree of permitting sinne is before the decree of reprobation that is the decree of damning for sinne But this cannot be as I endeavour to prove by two reasons The first is this There is no order in intentions but between the intention of the end and the intention of the means and the order is this that the intention of the end is before the intention of the means Therefore if the decree of permitting sinne be before the decree of damning for sinne the decree of permitting sinne must be the intention of the end and the decree of damning for sinne must be the intention of the meanes But this is notoriously untrue For it is apparent that damnation tends not to the permission of sinne as the end thereof for if it did then men were damned to this end that they might be permitted to sinne But far more likely it is that sinne should be permitted to this end that a man might be damned which yet by no means doe I a vouch other reasons I have to shew the vanity of this argumentation I rather professe that permssion of sinne and damnation are not subordinate as end means but coordinate both being means tending joyntly to a farther end which under correction from understandings purged from prejudice and false principles I take to be the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice vindicative 2. My second reason is if permission of sinne be first in intention and then damnation it followes that permission of sinne should be last in execution but this is most absurd namely that a man should be first damned and then suffered to sinne 2. My second principall argument is this Reprobation as it signifies Gods decree is the act of Gods will now the act of Gods will is the very will of God and the will of God is Gods essence and like as there can be no cause of Gods essence so there can be no cause of Gods will or of the act thereof Upon some such arguments as these Aquinas disputes that the predestination of Christ cannot be the cause of our Predestination adding that they are one act in God And when he comes to the resolution of the question he grants all as touching actum volentis that the one cannot be the cause of the other But only quoad praedestinationis terminum which is grace and glory or the things predestinated Christ is the cause of them but not of our predestination as touching the act of God predestinating And I think I may be bold to presume that Christs merits are of as great force to be the cause why God should elect man unto salvation as mans sinnes are of force to be the cause why God should reprobate him unto damnation The same Aquinas a tall fellow as touching Scolasticall argumentation hath professed that no man hath been so mad as to say that merits are the cause of predestination quoad actum praedestinantis and why but because there can be no cause on mans part of the will of God quoad actum volentis Now reprobation is well knowne to be the will of God as well as election and therefore no cause can there be on mans part thereof quoad actum reprobantis And it is well knowne there is a predestination unto death as well as unto life and consequently t is as mad a thing in his judgement to maintaine that merits are the cause there of quoad actum praedestinantis God by efficacious grace could breake off any mans infidelity if it pleased him that is by affording him such a motion unto faith as he foresaw would be yeelded unto this is easily proved by the evident confession of Arminius formerly specified Now Why doth God so order it as to move some in such a manner as he foresees they will believe others in such a māner as he foresees they will not believe but because his purpose is to manifest the glory of his grace in the salvation of the one and the glory of his justice in the damnation of the other Herein I appeale to the judgement and conscience of every reasonable creature that understands it in spight of all prejudice and false principles to corrupt him 4. In saying sinne foreseen is the cause of Gods decree of damnation they presuppose a prescience of sinne as of a thing future without all ground For nothing can be foreknown as future unlesse it be future now these disputers presuppose a futurition of sinne and that from eternity without all ground For consider no sinne is future in its own nature for in its own nature it is meerely possible and indifferent as well not to be future as to become future and therefore it cannot passe out of the condition of a thing meerely possible into the condition of a thing future without a cause Now what cause doe these men devise of the futurition of sinne Extra Deum nothing can be the cause thereof For this passage of things out of the condition of things possible into the condition of things future was from everlasting for from everlasting they were future otherwise God could not have known them from everlasting And consequently the cause of this passage must be acknowledged to have been from everlasting and consequently nothing without God could be the cause of it seeing nothing without God was from everlasting Therefore the cause hereof must be found intra Deum within God then either the will of God which these men doe utterly disclaime or the knowledge of God but that is confessed to presuppose things future rather then to make them so or the essence of God now that may be considered either as working necessarily and if in that manner it were the cause of things future then all such things should become future by necessity of nature which to say is Atheisticall or as working freely and this is to grant that the will of God is the cause why every thing meerely possible in its own nature doth passe from everlasting into the condition of a thing future if so be it were future at all And indeed seeing no other cause can be pitched upon this free will of God must be acknowledged to be the cause of it And consequently the reason why every thing becomes future is because God hath determined it shall come to passe but with this difference All good things God hath determined shall come to passe by his effection All evill things God hath determined shall come to passe by his permission And the Scripture naturally affords plentifull testimony to confirme this without forcing it to interpretations congruous hereunto upon presumptuous grounds that these arguments proceed from
was sufficient to convert them which must be by the Antithesis to bring them to faith provided that they that is the hearers play the good husbands in the using of it But what is it to play the good husbands These and such like Phrasiologies are the usuall sculking courses of the Arminians like the inke which the Fish Saepia casts forth that she may thereby the better hide her selfe and escape from the hands of the Fisher But certainly it must be some worke or other to be performed by the hearer whereby he shall be brought to faith therefore I say it is either the worke of Faith it selfe or some other worke preceding it not of faith it selfe for faith it selfe cannot in reason be said to be a worke whereby a man is brought to faith Secondly herehence it followeth that Mans good husbandry being here distinguished from the worke of Faith it selfe the act of Faith is hereby made the work of mans will not of Gods grace if some work preceding faith whereupon faith is wrought by grace it followeth that the grace of faith is given according to mans works this is the foule issue of their tenet making faith either not at all the worke of God or if wrought by God to be wrought according to mans worke And thus they shape the grace of God conferring faith not only towards Reprobates but also towards the elect Now observe I beseech you how our Brittaine Divines doe purposely reject this Doctrine in the Synod of Dort art 3. in their third Thesis of those which are rejected by them The Thesis which they reject is positis omnibus gratiae operationibus quibus Deus ad efficiendam hanc conversionem utitur voluntatem hominis relinqui in aequilibrio velitne credere vel non credere convertete se ad Deum vel non convertere All the operations of grace supposed the will of man is left in an even ballance whether he will believe or no whether he will convert himselfe to God or no this is the very opinion of this Author against which our worthy Divines dispute there in this manner If this were so then it would follow that God by his grace is not the principall cause of mans believing and conversion but man by his free will rather For in this case God shall not predominantly worke mans conversion but upon condition only to wit in case the will first move it selfe whereby the lesse worke is given to God and the greater worke to man to wit in mans conversion 2. Herehence it will follow that God gives no more grace to the Elect than to the Reprobate and that the elect are not bound to be more thankefull to God than the non-elect because the worke of God in both is no other than to place the will in an even ballance 3. The grace of conversion is given with an intention that it shall prove effectuall and to move nay rather to bring man to the producing of the act of faith in such sort as it cannot be made in vaine Haec gratia a nullo duro corde respuitur ideo quippe tribuitur ut cordis duritia primitus auferatur And seeing the good Husbandry of mans consists in obedience to the Gospell it appears hereby that the grace they speake of is no other than the Gospell exhorting to repentance and this we confesse is sufficient in a certain kind to wit in the kind of instruction and exhortation and is not this sufficient to convict of unbeliefe as many as wilfully resist it and such is the condition of all in hearing the Gospell to whom God gives not the grace of conversion for as Saint Austin saith Libertas sine gratiâ non est libertas sed contumacia and no other impotency of beliefe doe we ascribe to a naturall man but such as consists in contumacy which is meerely a fault and corruption of the will not the defect of any naturall power and therefore as I said the impotemcy of converting to God by faith and repentance is impotency morall consisting meerely in the corruption of the will and there is no question but every man hath as much power to believe as Simon Magus of whom it is said that he believed Fides in voluntate est saith Austin credimus quando volumus but the will of man is so corrupt that without speciall preparation by Gods grace it is rather wilfully set to walke in the waies of flesh and bloud than obsequious to that which is good we make no question but that as Prosper saith every one that heareth the Gospell is thereby called unto grace even to obtaine pardon of sinne and salvation upon his faith in Christ and is called upon also to believe but withall we say with our Brittaine Divines Art 3. De Conversione Thesi 1a. In the explication thereof that God gives his elect not only posse credere si velint which in Austins opinion lib. 1. de gen contra Manic cap. 3. and de praedest Sanct. cap. 5. is common to all but velle credere nay they spare not to professe that if God should worke in us only posse credere posse convertere and leave the act of believing and converting to mans free will we should all doe as Adam did and fall from God through our free will and never bring this possibility into act take their own words Quod si vires quasdam infundendo daret Deus tantum posse credere posse convertere ipsum interim actum committeret libero hominum arbitrio certe quod primus parens fecit faceremus omnes libero arbitrio a Deo deficeremus nec possibilitatem hanc in actum perduceremus Haec itaque eximia est illa specialis gratia qua non modo possunt credere si velint sed volunt cum possunt Phil. 3. 13. Dat Deus nobis velle perficere As for that which he discourseth of Gods principall aime that the Church of Israell should bring forth good fruit let us speake plainly and not cheat our selves first and then become impostors unto others was it that which God did principally intend Gods intentions are his decrees now if God did decree they should bring forth fruit de facto who hath resisted his will Nay take their own rules according to their doctrine of Scientia media Why did God give them only such a grace to move them unto fruitfulnes which he foresaw they would resist And refuse to give such grace as he foresaw would not be resisted and that without all prejudice to their wills Let thē answer unto this for that God in the storehouse of his wisdome hath such courses as being used he foreseeth infalliby that any sin will be hindred Arminius acknowledgeth as I have oftē alleadged him But we may safely say 1. That God intended it should be their duty to bring forth fruit 2. If he did farther intend that the Church of Israel should de facto bring forth fruit this he
speaks of the necessity of it unto salvation or that many thousands are now adaies regenerated without any Sacrament of regeneration That the Spirit of God is the efficient cause of Regeneration I think no Christian doubteth but this Author maketh the Baptizing with Water to be an efficient also as when he saith Baptisme is appoynted to be a means of Regeneration to all that are Baptized and not only so but that it doth effect it also in all that doe not put an obstacle in the way to hinder it I acknowledge willingly that Baptisme materiall is an instrument to wit both as a signe as a seale But that it is an instrument in any other kind of operation than belongs to a signe and seale I have not hitherto learned out of the word of God And as I remember Arminius was sometimes challenged for Heterodoxy about the Sacraments and withall that his Apology was this he never ascribed any other efficacy unto the Sacraments than is denoted under the tearmes of Signes and Seales but no marvaile if a degenerated condition hath seized on any that such proficiunt in pejus and grow more and more degenerate The phrase used here in calling Baptisme a means of regeneration sounds harsh in my eares we commonly say and it is the doctrine of our Catechisme that a Sacrament is an outward and visible signe of an inward and invisible grace now this grace in Baptisme I take to be the grace of regeneration and is it a decent expression to say that the signe of Regeneration is the means of Regeneration As for Baptismus spiritus the Baptisme of the spirit that is the very working of regeneration but Baptismus fluminis the Baptisme of water that is the administration of the outward signe and seale of the grace of regeneration The word Preacheth forgivenesse of sinnes to all that believe so doth the Sacrament of Baptisme but the word Preacheth this to the eare the Sacrament to the eye The word assureth it for it is Gods word the Sacrament assures it for it is Gods seale but neither of these worketh the assurance without the spirit of God and as for the working of Faith it selfe I have read that Faith comes by hearing I no where read that Faith comes by the being Baptized And sure I am when men of ripe yeares came to be Baptized they were first Catechumini then competentes and none admitted unto Baptisme unlesse the word had formerly brought them unto faith The Apostle calls Baptisme the laver of regeneration by the Rhemists translation the fountain of regeneration by the former English translation the washing of regeneration by the last but whereas this Author dignifies it with this title because it doth effect regeneration in all that doe not put an obstacle in the way to hinder it if this Author shall prove it while his head is hot we shall give that credence to it as it deserves in the mean time it stands for a bold affirmation let him take his time to make it appeare to be sound the Rhemists upon the place have this note As before in the Sacrament of holy Orders 1 Tim. 4. 2 Tim. 1. So here it is plaine that Baptisme giveth grace and that by it as by an instrumentall cause we be saved Master Fulkes answer is this Here is no word to prove that Baptisme giveth grace of the worke wrought but the Apostle saith that God hath saved us by the renewing of the Holy Ghost which is testified by the Sacrament of Baptisme marke I pray the office of Baptisme in Master Fulkes judgement to testify the renewing which is Sacramentally the laver of regeneration not by the worke wrought but by the grace of Gods spirit by which we are justified So speaketh Saint Peter and explicateth himselfe 1 Pet. 3. 21. Baptisme saveth us not the washing of the flesh of the body but the interrogation of a good conscience And because I know no obstacle that an Infant can put to hinder the effect of it for I suppose the obstacle must be rationall and Infants are not come to the use of reason to performe any rationall act which may prove any rationall obstacle therefore it seems this Authors opinion is that all who are Baptized in the Church are regenerate this indeed was the profession of Master Mountague before he was Bishop and was answered by Bishop Carelton as touching the best firmament of his opinion the Book of our Common-Prayer where the Child Baptized is said to be regenerate that is to be understood Sacramento tenus which is Saint Austins phrase and which he distinguisheth from truly regenerate And Bishop Usher in his History of Gotteschaleus alleadgeth out of the Author of the imperfect work upon Mathew Hom. 5. this sentence Eos qui cum tentati fuerint superantur pereunt videri quidem filios Dei factos propter aquam Baptismatis revera tamen non esse filios Dei quia non sunt in Spiritu Baptizati As also out of Austin De Unitate Ecclesiae cap. 19. Visibilem Baptismum posse habere alienos qui regnum Dei non possidebunt sed esse donum Spiritus Sancti quod proprium eorum est tantum qui regnabunt cum Christo in aeternum And lastly out of the same Austin as he is alleadged by Peter Lombard l. 4. Sent. dis 4. Sacramenta in solis electis efficere quod figurant All this is to be found in that Book of Bishop Usher p. 188. Besides many more pregnant passages are collected by him for the same purpose And not to charge him with authority only but with some reason when Saint James saith Jam. 1. 18. Of his own will he hath begotten us by the word of truth what I pray is here meant by the word of truth Is it not the Gospell to wit The Preaching of Christ crucified Now consider to whom doth he write but to the twelve Tribes that is to the Christian Jewes such as were begotten to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ as Saint Peter speakes writing also to the Jewes If then these Jewes were regenerated by the Preaching of the Gospell surely they were not regenerated by Circumcision and if regeneration were not necessarily annexed to the Sacrament of Circumcision amongst the Jewes then neither is it necessarily affixed to the Sacrament of Baptisme amongst the Christians For our Divines doe usually maintaine against the Papists that the Sacraments of the Old Testament were as effectuall to the Jewes as the Sacraments of the New Testament are effectuall unto us Christians It is true Baptisme is ordained that those which doe receive it may have the remission of their sinnes but not absolutely but conditionally to wit in case they believe and repent as appears both in that place Acts 2. 38. and Rom. 4. 11. And Baptisme as a Seale doth assure hereof only in case they believe and repent and therefore none of ripe years were admitted unto Baptisme untill
they made profession of their faith and as for Infants they were also anciently said to be Baptized in fide Parentum Gods patience Rom. 2. 4. And the goodnesse of God manifested therein leadeth a Man to repentance so doe his judgements also Hos 5. In their affliction they will seeke me early and so doth Gods word and all this only in the way of a moving cause and exciting to repentance every morning God brings his judgements to light he faileth not yet will not the wicked be ashamed Zeph 3. 5. But it is the duty of all to be moved by his word by his works by his mercyes by his judgments to turne to the Lord by true repentance But God alone is he that workes them hereunto without whose efficacious grace none of all these courses will prevaile as Isai 57. 17. For his wicked covetousnesse I was angry with him and have smiten him I hid me and was angry They wanted neither admonition from his word nor from his corrections yet they profited by neither as it followeth yet he went away and turned after the way of his own heart yet what is Gods resosolution but to overcome their stubbornesse by the power of his grace as there we read I have seen his waies and will heale them now who are these whom he leads so as to bring them to repentance let Austin answer Contra Julian Pelag. l. 5. c. 4. Bonitas Dei te ad poenitentiam adducit verum esse constat sed quem praedestinavit adducit and he adds a reason Quamtamlibet enim praebuerit poenitentiam nisi Deus dederit quis agit poenitentiam And in the same Chapter professeth touching the Non-praedestinate that God never brings them to wholsome and spirituall repentance whereby a man is reconciled to God in Christ whether God affords them greater patience than he affords his elect or nothing lesse His words are these Istorum neminem adducit ad poenitentiam salubrem spiritualem qua homo in Christo reconciliatur Deo sive illis ampliorem patientiam sive non imparem praebeat God intends by this his patience that it is the duty of all to repent that is that they should repent ex officio but did he intend they should de facto repent what then could hinder it Then he would afford them efficacious grace to heale them as he promiseth Isai 57. 18. Then would he rule them with a mighty hand and make them passe under the rodde and bring them unto the bond of the covenant So then to the poynt in particular here observed 1. God leads all to repentance by his goodnesse manifested in his forbearance and long suffering by way of admonition that it is their duty to turne unto God by repentance while he gives them time and space for repentance 2. But as for those whom he hath elected he not only thus leads but also effectually brings them to repentance in the time he hath appoynted before which time they are found sometimes to despise the riches of his goodnesse and to have hard and impenitent hearts as much as any Reprobate who more foule in the committing of horrible abominations than Manasses Who more furious in persecuting the Church of God then Saul Yet God took away the stony heart and what is harder then stone out of their bowells and so he doth to all whom he regenerates 3. As touching a finall contempt of Gods patience that is peculiar unto Reprobates as for the elect though some are called at the first houre of the day some not till the last yet all are effectually called before they drop out of the World To say that God intends the everlasting good of Reprobates is to deny the first Article of our Creed even Gods omni potency as Austin hath disputed 1200 years agoe we find in our selves that whatsoever we will doe if we doe not it it is either because we cannot doe it or because our will is changed but to ascribe either mutability or impotency to God is intollerable in a Christian and it cannot be denied but God did from everlasting intend their everlasting damnation so that to say he did intend their everlasting good is flat contradiction neither is there any way to charme it but by saying God intends their everlasting good conditionally but to intend it after such a manner is apparently no more to intend their salvation than their damnation nay lesse rather considering the conditions of salvation are utterly impossible unto man unlesse God correct and cure his corrupt nature but this grace he dispenseth according to the meere pleasure of his will as the Apostle signifyeth in saying he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth As for that 2 Pet. 3. 9. He is patient towards us not willing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any of us to perish it hath been already considered but here he interpreteth towards us as if it had been said towards us men and I hope the elect are men as well as others but what ground hath he for this liberty of interpretation Why may he not take the liberty in interpreting of Iohn as well as Peter both were pillars Gal. 2. where he saith They went out from us but they were not of us for had they been of us they had continued with us and still swalloweth a palpable absurdity following hereupon even to the denying of Gods omnipotency in as flat contradiction to the Apostle where he professeth that God hath mercy on whom he will which is not to have mercy on all but on some only hardening others as Rom. 11. The election hath obtained it but the rest are hardned DISCOURSE SECT V. IN the last place those other gifts of God whereby mens understandings are enlightened and their soules beautifyed which are knowledge repentance fortitude liberality temperance humility charity and such like are bestowed upon all them that have them among whom are many that may prove Reprobates in the end that by the exercise of them and continuance in them they might be Saved The Reprobates are adorned with many of those graces as apears plainly by many Scriptures especially Hebr. 6. 4. Where the Apostle sayes that it is impossible for those that have been enlightned tasted the heavenly gift been made partakers of the Holy Ghost tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come if they fall away should be renewed by repentance and the graces which the Apostle speakes of here are not ordinary and common but speciall graces illumination faith relish of the sweetnesse of Gods Word and the tast of Heaven The persons spoken of are Apostates such as are under the possibility of falling away for upon a dainger not possible cannot be built a solid exhortation and if Apostates then Reprobates and the thing intimated is that upon Apostates and Reprobates are these gifts bestowed The Like speech we have Hebr. 10. 26. For if we sinne willingly after we have received the
like as none were more opposite to the Epicures then they so none were more religious and devout among the Heathens then they Yet there is no opinion so true or good but by a prophane heart may be abused But as for the efficacy of Gods will we are so farre from maintaining that it takes away either the liberty of mans will or the contingency of second causes that we professe with Aquinas that the root of all contingency is the efficacious will of God and with the Authors of the Articles of the Church of Ireland Artic. 11. That God did from all eternity ordaine whatsoever in time should come to passe and yet neither the liberty nor the contingency of second causes is thereby destroyed but established rather DISCOURSE The Fift and last sort of Reasons It is an Enimy to True Comfort SECT I. I Am come to my last reason against it drawn from the Vncomfortablenesse of it It is a doctrine full of desperation both to them that stand and to them that are fallen to men out of temptation and in it It 1. Leads men into temptation 2. Leaves men in it And therefore it is no part of Gods word for that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good newes to men a store-house of sweet consolations for them that stand and such as are fallen These things are written saith the Apostle Rom. 15. 4. That by patience and consolation of the Scriptures we might have hope implying that therefore was the word written and left to the Church that by the comforts contained in it those poore soules that look towards heaven might never want in any changes or chances of this mortall life a sweet gale of hope to refresh them and carry on their ship full merrily towards the Haven It leads men into temptation and into such a one too as is as sharpe and dangerous as any the tempter hath The Devill can easily perswade any man that makes absolute reprobation a part of his creed that he is one of those absolute Reprobates because there are more absolute Reprobates even an hundred for one then absolute chosen ones and a man hath a great deale more reason to think that he is one of the most then one of the least one of the huge multitude of inevitable castawaies then one of the little flock for whom God hath absolutely prepared a Kingdome Such a man is not only capable of but framed and fashioned by his opinion for this suggestion which is a very sore one if we may believe Calvin Bucer and Zanchius Calvin tells us Quod nulla tentatione vel gravius vel periculosius fideles percellit Satan that the Devill cannot assault a believer with a temptation more dangerous And a little after he saith It is so much the deadlier by how much commoner it is then any other Rarissimus est cujus non interdum animus hac cogitatione feriatur unde tibi salus nisi ex Dei electione Electionis autem quae tibi revelatio Quae si apud quempiam semel invaluit aut diris tormentis miserum perpetuo exeruciat aut reddit penitus attonitum So ordinary is the temptation that he who is at all times free from it is a rare man we are to conceive that he speakes of those that believe absolute reprobation and so dangerous it is that if it get strength he which is under it is either miserably tormented or mightily astonished And a little after this he saith againe Ergo si naufragium timemus sollicité ab hoc scopulo cavendum in quem nunquam sine exitio impingitur He that will not wrack his soule must keep from this rock Bucer also hath a passage like to this Vt caput omnis noxiae tentationis saith he repellenda est quaestio sumusnè praedestinati Nam qui de hoc dubitat nec vocatumse nec justificatum esse credere poterit hoc est nequit esse Christianus This doubt whether we are predestinated or no Must be repelled as the head of every pernitious temptation for he that doubts of this cannot be a Christian Praesumendum igitur ut principium fidei nos omnes esse a Deo praescitos Every man therefore must presume it as a principle of faith that he is elected This very speech of Bucers Zanchy makes use of to the same purpose We see then by the restimony of these worthy men that this temptation is very dangerous and ordinary too to such as think there are absolute reprobates The truth of both will farther appeare by the example of Petrus Hosuanus a Schoolemaster in Hungary who intending to hang himselfe signified in a letter which he left in his study for the satisfaction of his friends and Countrymen the cause of it in that writing he delivered these three things 1. That he was of Calvins and S. Austins opinion that men are not dealt withall secundum bona or mala opera according to their works good or evill but that there are occultiores causae more hidden causes of mens eternall condition 2. That he was one of that woefull company of absolute castawaies Vas formatum in ignominiam a vessell prepared to dishonour and that therefore though his life had been none of the worst he could not possibly be saved 3. That being unable to beare the dreadfull apprehensions of wrath with which he was affrighted he hanged himselfe For these are some of his last words there recorded Discedo igitur ad Lacus Infernales aeternum dedecus patriae meae Deo vos commendo cujus misericordia mihi negata est I goe to those infernall lakes a perpetuall reproach to my Country commending you to God whose mercy is denyed mee Out of this example we may easily collect two things 1. That men who think that there are many whom God hath utterly rejected out of his only will and pleasure may be easily brought to think by Satans suggestion that they are of that company And 2. That this temptation is very dangerous I conclude therefore the first part of my last Reason that absolute Reprobation leads men into temptation TWISSE Consideration AS I remember when this Author first had resort unto some prime stickler for the Arminian way to conferre with him there about it was told me that this Authour should alledge that our doctrine of election was a comfortable doctrine but then on the other side it was alledged that granting that yet with all it did expose to dessolutenes of life And therefore I little expect any such argument as this to be proposed least of all to be ranged amonst the nūber of those that are taken to be of a convincing nature Yet is it the lesse strange because the Apostle telleth us of some that their course is proficere in pejus to growe worse and worse But let us consider whether he speeds any better in this then in the former And whereas he saith It is a doctrine full of desperation both to them that stand
the word of God But Ecce Rhodus ecce Saltus we are come to the Dialogue it selfe where he undertakes to make good that which he saith And here begins the Enterlude Tempted Woe is me I am a Castaway I am utterly rejected from grace and Glory CONSIDERATION Let me take liberty to set down what I should think fit to answer unto such a complaint Now my Answer is this Who hath revealed this unto thee Art thou privy Councellour to the Almighty We are taught that secret things belong to the Lord our God but the things revealed are for us and for our Children to doe them Now where and when and how hath God revealed this his counsell unto thee namely concerning thy rejection from Grace Glory We know no other revelations divine then are contayned in his Word Now hath God in his word revealed unto thee more then unto me that thou art a reprobate The word saith unto thee If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom 10. 9. Now how canst thou make it appeare that this belongs lesse unto thee then to any Martyr that ever was content to lay downe his life for Christ Wilt thou say Thy sinnes make thee to conceive so I answer are thy sinnes greater then were the sinnes of Manasses who made his sonnes passe through the fire to Molech gave himselfe to witchcraft and sorcery and filled Jerusalem with bloud from corner to corner If his sinns were not sufficient to conclude that he was a Reprobate why should thy sins be thought sufficient to conclude that thou art a Cast-away Are thy sinnes greater then Sauls were who was a Blasphemer a Persecutor of the Saints of God from Citty to Citty Yet was he received unto mercy Wilt thou say Thy sinnes have been committed since thy calling Yet are they greater then was the sinne of Peter in denying Christ his Master with execrations and oathes And these sinns were committed not only after his calling but even within his Masters hearing too Yet he went out and wept bitterly And Christ as soone as he was risen sent word of his resurrection by name to Peter to comfort him Nay hath not God taught us in his word that the bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne 1 John 1. And how canst thou make it appeare that any one that ever was or is hath greater interest therein then thy selfe wilt thou say this remedy belongs unto none but such as believe and repent but I doe not I answere in like sort there was a time when Paul believed not and when every one believed not yet at length they believed and so maist thou wilt thou say But I cannot believe and repent I answer this is the condition of all till God takes away the stony heart out of their bowells and gives them a heart of flesh and puts his owne spirit within them wilt thou say God gives grace to others but not to thee I answer there was a time when God had not mercy on them at length an houre came wherin he called them so an houre may come wherin he may call thee And thou hast no more cause to conclude that he hath rejected thee then every Child of God had before his calling that God had rejected him without grace neither thou canst nor they could believe but grace can bring all to faith and repentance and thou hast no more cause to think that God will not bring thee to faith then any elect had before his calling to think that God would not bring him to faith Now seeing this grace is given in the Word doe thou wait upon God in his owne ordinance which any naturall man hath power to doe as namely to goe heare a sermon thou knowest not how it may worke upon thee yea though thou commest thither with a wicked mind For we read of some that comming to take Christ were taken by him And Father Latimer taking notice of some that come to Church to take a nap yet never the lesse saith he let them come they may be taken napping Minister Discourage not thy selfe thou poore afflicted soule God hath not cast thee off for he hateth nothing that he hath made but bears a love to all men and to thee amongst the rest CONSIDERATION And not only poore but miserable also is that afflicted soule that hath no better comforter whether we consider the nature of the consolation or the warrant of it For first hath not God made Froggs and Toades and Devills as well as man And hath an Arminian that boasts so much of strongest arguments of comfort no better comfort to an afflicted soule then that she is Gods creature which is the condition of a Frogge and a Divill and a damned spirit 2. Then as touching the warrant of it Is the booke of Wisdome the best store-house of comfort for an afflicted soule a booke writen by Philo the Jew that living after Christs passion resurrection and ascention yet never believed in him Againe speake out and tell us what is the fruit of that love which God beares to all men Hath he ordained to give Salvation unto all to this afflicted soule in particular If he hath not but damnation rather unto some and particularly to this soule for upon what ground darest thou say or canst assure he hath not art not thou as miserable a comforter to her as ever Jobs friends were to him Or hath God ordained to give all men the grace of regeneration the grace of faith and repentance if so then either absolutely or conditionally if absolutely then all must be regenerate all must believe and repent If conditionally speake it out and let thy Patient know what condition that is on performance whereof by man God will give him faith say what thou wilt the comfortable issue shall be this That grace is given according to workes and this indeed is the only Arminian consolation Tempted 1. God hateth no man as he is his creature but he hates a great many as they are involved in the first transgression and become guilty of Adams sinne CONSIDERATION Pooresoule suffer not thy selfe to be instructed by them that labour to deprive thee not only of the comfort of Gods grace but of the comfort of common sence Dost thou well understand what it is to hate a man as a sinner and not as a man If hatred be no more then displeasure surely whatsoever be the cause of it in hating thee he is displeased with thee as thou art his creature and that in thy proper kind of man if withall it signify punishment whatsoever the cause thereof be surely he punisheth thee as man though not for thy natures sake for that is the worke of God but for some corruption he finds in thee And we should prove very sorry comforters if on such a distinction as this we should ground any true
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
be as ready to worke it in themselves 3. And now I come to this Authors third Topick place of consolation drawn from the universality of the Covenant of grace Now this is as strange as any of the former or rather much more and when the Covenant of grace is so much enlarged we have cause to feare that it is confounded with the Covenant of Workes And indeed if it were true as some of this sect professe namely that there is an universall grace given to al for the enlivening of their wills wherby they are enabled to will any spirituall good whereunto they shall be excited and to believe if they will and from the love of temporall things to convert themselves to the keeping of Gods Commandements if they will I see no reason but that the Law is able to give life though the Apostle supposeth the contrary and the way is as open unto man for justification by the workes of the Law as it was unto Adam in the state of innocency And if the Covenant of grace be universall and ever was for that I take to be this Authours meaning then God was no more the God of Abraham and of his seed then of all the World nether was the people of Israel more the Lords portion then any other Nation of the World yet Moses was sent unto Pharaoh in their behalfe with this Message Thus sayth the Lord Israell is my sonne my first borne wherefore I say unto thee Let my sonne goe that he may serve mee if thou refuse to let him goe Behold I will slay thy sonne even thy first borne Ex 4. 22 23. Thus God accounts them albeit they were miserably corrupted with Idolatry as it appeares Ez 20. 6. In the day that I lift up my hand upon them to bring them forth of the Land of Egypt 7. Then sayd I unto them Let every one cast a way the abominations of his eies and defile not your selves with the Idolls of Egypt for I am the Lord your God 8. But they rebelled against me and would not heare me for none cast away the abominations of their eyes neither did they forsake the Idolls of Egypt then I thought to poure out mine Indignation upon them and to accomplish my wrath against them in the midst of the Land of Egypt 9. But I had respect unto my name that it should not be polluted of the Heathen So he proceded in despite of their sinnes to carry them out of the Land of Egypt and brought them into the wildernesse and gave them Statutes and Judgments and his Sabaths v 10 11 12. But they rebelled against him in the Wildernesse whereupon he thought againe to poure out his indignation upon them in the Wildernesse to consume them v. 13. But he had respect unto his name v. 14. amd his eie spared them and would not destroy them v. 17. And againe when their Children provoked him by rebelling against him whereupon he thought of powring out his Indignation upon them v. 21. Neverthelesse he withdrew his hand and had respect unto his name v. 22. Then as touching the generation of that present time he professeth he will rule them with a mighty hand v. 33. And the issue thereof is no worse then this I will cause you to passe under the rod and bring you into the bond of the Covenant v. 37 And againe marke with what a gratious promise he concludes v. 43. There shall ye remember your wayes and all the workes wherein ye have been defiled and ye shall judge yourselves worthy to be cast of for all your evills which you have committed 44. And ye shall know that I am the Lord when I have respect unto you for my names sake and not after your wicked waies nor according to your corrupt worke O yee house of Israel saith the Lord God Here is the peculiar fruit of the Covenant of grace to master their iniquities to bring them unto repentance and to deliver them from the dominion of sinne and Satan If God performe this Grace to all and every one throughout the World then is the Covenant of grace universall and all and every one are under it but if there be few very few over whom sinne hath not the dominion then certainly very few are under the Covenant of grace For the Apostle plainly signifyeth this to be the fruit of the Covenant of grace where he saith Sinne shall not have dominion over you for ye are not under the Law but under grace Rom 6. 14. And the like we have Heb. 8. 8. I will make with the House of Judah a new Testament 9. Not like the Testament that I made with their fathers in the day that I tooke them by the hands to lead them out of the Land of Egypt For they continued not in my Testament and I regarded them not saith the Lord. 10. For this is the Testament that I will make with the House of Israell after those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Lawes in their mind and in their heart I will write them and I will be their God and they shall be my people 11. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother saying Know the Lord for all shall know me from the least of them to the greatest of them 12. For I will be mercyfull unto their unrighteousnesse and I will remember their sinnes and their iniquities no more According to this Covnant proceed those gratious promises whereof the Scriptures are full I have seen his wayes and I will heale them Es 57. 18. I will heale their rebellions Hos 14. 5. The Lord will subdue our iniquities Mich. 7. I will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your children to love me with all your heart and with all your soule Deut 30. 6. I am the Lord your God which sanctify you c And therefore these comforts which here are so much magnified as only and fully sufficient for the releeving of an afflicted soul in the hour of temptation are but so many lies to speake in the Prophets phrase that this Author holds in his right hand and if through the illusions of Satan he take hold of them they may cast him into a dreame like unto the dreame of an hungry man who eateth and drinketh and maketh merry but when he awaketh his soule is empty For all these comforts so magnificently set forth have no force save in case a man believe them now if a man believeth our doctrine can assure him of Everlasting Life and so of his election which the Arminian cannot For we teach that which our Saviour hath taught us He that believeth in the Son hath Everlasting Life and he that obayeth not the Sonne shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth upon him But as for the performing of faith they leave that unto man together with Gods concurrence And in like sort for the maintenance of their faith they teach a man to put
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
that they shall come to passe in such a manner as joyned with a possibility of not cōing to passe otherwise they should come to passe not contingently but necessarily But it is growne to be this Authours naturall genius miserably to overreach while he keeps himselfe to his own formes inshaping the opinion of his adversaries impatient to be beaten out of them and to have his veteres avias à pulmone repelli oldgrandmothers vain conceits to be pulled out of Lastly this Authour shapeth us to make damnation an end intended by God which we conceive to be a very shallow project we know nothing but Gods owne glory that can be this end And therefore even there where Solomon professeth that God made the wicked against the day of Evill herewithall acknowledgeth that God made all thinges forhimselfe At length we have gotten cleare aboard to come acquainted with this Authours full discourse and not by patches as hitherto we have done For here he promiseth to acquaint us with the reasons that have convinced him of the untruth of absolute Reprobation as it is carried the upper way and like a Martialist a man at armes he tells us they fight against it and thus the interpolator discourseth The first part of the first Argument against the supralapsarians sect 1. They are drawen ab incommodo from the greater evils and inconveniences which issue from it naturally which may be referred to two maine heads 1 The dishonour of God 2 The overthrow of religion and government It dishououreth God For it chargeth him deeply with two things no wayes agreeable to his nature 1 Mens Eternall torments in Hell 2 Their sinnes on Earth First It chargeth him with Mens eternall torments in Hell and maketh him to be the prime principall 2nd invincible cause of the damnation of Millions of miserable soules The prime cause because it reporteth him to have appointed them to distruction of his owne voluntary disposition antecedent to all deserts in them and the Principall and invincible cause because it maketh the Damnation of Reprobates to be necessary and unavoydable thorough Gods absolute and uncontroulable decree and soe necessary that they can no more escape it then poore Astyanax could avoyd the breaking of his necke when the Graecians tumbled him downe from the Tower of Troy Now this is an neavy charge contrary to scripture Gods nature and sound Reason 1 To Scripture which makes man the Principall nay the only cause in opposition to God of his owne ruine Thy destruction is of thy selfe ô Israell but in me is thine help As I live saith the Lord I will not the death of the wicked c. Turne yee turne yee why will yee dye He doth not afflict willingly nor greive the Children of men To which speech for likeneile sake I will joyne one of Prospers Gods predestination is to many the cause of standing to none of falling 2 It is contrary to Gods nature who sets forth himselfe to be a God mercifull gracious long suffering abundant in goodnesse c. And he is acknowledged to be soe by King David Thou Lord art good and mercifull and of great Kindnesse to all them that call upon thee And by the Prophets Joell Jonah and Michah He is gracious and mercifull slow to anger and of great Kindnesse And who saith Micah is a God like unto thee that taketh away iniquity c. He retaineth not his wrath for ever because mercy pleaseth him 3 'T is contrary also to sound reason which cannot but argue such a Decree of extreame cruelty and consequently remove it from the father of mercyes We cannot in reason thinke that any man in the world can so farre put off humanity and nature as to resolve with himselfe to marry and beget Children that after they be borne and have lived a while with him he may hang them up by the tongues teare thir flesh with scourges pull it from their bones with burning pincers or put them to any cruell tortures that by thus torturing them he may shew what his Authority and power is over them Much lesse can we believe without great violence to reason that the God of mercy can so farre forget himselfe as out of his absolute pleasure to ordaine such infinite multitudes of his Children made after his owne image to everlasting fire and create them one after another that after the end of a short life here he might torment them without end hereafter to shew his power and soveraingty over them If to destroy the righteous with the wicked temporally be such a peece of injustice that Abraham removeth it from God with an Absit wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked that be farre from thee O Lord. shall not the judge of all the world doe right How deepely may we thinke would that good man have detested one single thought that God resolveth upon the destruction of many innocent soules eternally in hell fire Here this Authour carrieth himselfe like another Ptolomeus Ceraunus or as if he had some cheife place in the lightning legion not by his prayers but by his discourse he seemes to thunder and to lighten all along When the Lord appeared to Elias he was neither in the mighty wind nor in the earthquake nor in the fire but in the still and soft voyce I hope to prove all this to be but Ignis fatuus Mountebancks use to make great ostentation and crackes but commonly they end in meere impostures and it is no hing strange when men opposing the grace of God loose their owne witts and please themselves in the confusion of their owne senses For when men are in love with their owne errours they hate the light yea the very light of nature in the distinct notice of it would be an offence unto them Can this Authour be ignorant of that which every meane Sophister knowes that there be foure kinds of causes Materiall Formall Efficient Finall that he should expatiate thus in speaking of a cause without all distinction Is it strange that God should be a prime cause and principall in execution of vengeance Doth he not professe saying vengeance is mine and I will repay Is he not called the God to whom vengeance belongeth And are not his magistrates his Ministers to execute vengeance temporall here in this world And can any sober man dout whether God be invincible whom the Apostle pronounceth to be irresistable Againe an efficient cause admits farther distinction for it is either Physicall or Morall Physicall is that which really workes or executes any thing as every tradesman hath his worke which his hands doe make so God hath his worke which he executes and his worke is judgment as well as mercy I am the Lord which shew mercy and judgment and righteousnesse for in these things I delight saith the Lord and he would have us when we doe glory glory in this that we doe understand and know him to
be such a God A Morall efficient is twofold being only of a moveing nature to move others to doe somewhat as namely either by perswading or by meriting or deserving He that perswades moves an other to doe some what he that meriteth thereby moves another either to reward him or punish him Now to walke in the light of this distinction and not to please our selves by walking in darknesse though God be the prime principall and invincible cause of man's damnation in the kind of a cause efficient physicall which should not seeme strange to an ordinary Christian who knowes full well that vengeance is God's peculiar worke as the Iudge of all the world and that he delights in the execution thereof yet this hinders not but that man may be the cause of his own damnation in the way of a meritorious cause justly deserving it Omnis poena Deum habet Authorem All punishment hath God for the Authour of it This is a principle acknowledged both by the Arminians and Vasquez the Jesuite but never is punishment inflicted on any by the hands of God save on those who formerly have deserved it Consider we farther as touching the severall kinds of causes formerly mentioned if the question be which is the principall Aristotle answereth that this is not confined to any one kind of them somtimes the materiall cause somtimes the formall cause somtimes the efficient somtimes the finall cause is the demonstrative cause the cause propter quam the cause by vertue where of the effect hath its existence but this peculiar and speciall cause is described thus It is that whereby satisfactory answer is made to the question demanding why such a thing is Now in execution of punishment or condigne vengeance this satisfactory answer is made by representing the meritorious cause never by representing the efficient cause as for example if it be demanded why such a malefactor is executed upon the gallowes no sober man will answer because the Sheriffe cōmanded it to be so or because the Judge would have it so but because he robd upon the high way or committed some criminall fact or other which is capitall by the lawes of our land and to be punished with hanging upon the gallowes In like sort if question be made why devills or wicked men are damned is it our doctrine to referre the cause hereof to the mere pleasure of God Doe not all confesse that God inflicts damnation upon thē merely for their sinnes and transgressions wherein they have continued unto death without repentance Yet we acknowledge that God could have taken them off from their sinnes while they lived if he would by giving them repentance as he hath dealt with us and that merely of his free grace For we willingly confes that our sinnes are our owne but our faith is not our repentance is not When I say our owne I meane in respect that they are of our selves otherwise we acknowledge both faith and repentance to be our owne accipiendo in asmuch as we receive them but they are God's gifts and so they are his dando in asmuch as he gives them as Remigius speaketh Now what is become of this Authours pompous discourse Is it not the like the cracking of thornes in the fire making a great noise but the light of distinction like fire sets an end unto it and makes it appeare in its owne likenesse and proves nothing but a squib For albeit God in his decree makes the damnation of reprobates to be necessary and unavoidable yet seeing he makes it not to fall on any but for their sinnes what colour of dishonour unto God in ordaining that Iudas shall necessarily and unavoidably be damned for betraying the Sonne of God and afterwards most desperatly murthering himselfe If hereupon he could no more avoid his damnation then Astionax could the breaking of his neck when the Grecians tumbled him downe from the tower of Troy will any man that is not bereaved of common sense make strange of this It is true God did appoint both Iudas and all other wicked persons that never break off their sinnes by repentance unto destructiō of his own voluntary disposition For God workes all things according to the counsaile of his will and if it pleased him he could annihilate them upon the fresh foot of any sin or after they have suffered the vengeance of hell fire as many yeares in hell as they lived here in sinne yea and the devills in hell as Origen was of opinion and the Jewes at this day are of the same by Sir Edwin Sandes his relation whether this Author be of the same or not I know not And lastly we willingly confesse that the decree of God was antecedent to the deserts of men for reprobation is as antient as election and election was made before the foundation of the world if we believe Saint Paul rather then any other who either by word or deed doth manifest himselfe to be of a contrary opinion Still damnation is inflicted by God only for sinne and in degree answerable unto their sinnes and only because of their sinnes as a meritorious cause thereof though God makes use of it to his owne ends and the manifestation of his owne glory as Solomon professeth namely that God made all things for himselfe even the wicked against the day of evill And Saint Paul tells that as the Lord suffereth with long patience the vessells of wrath prepared to destruction that he might shew his wrath and make his power known So likewise another reason hereof he specifies to be this That he might declare the riches of his glory upon the vessells of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory For when we shall behold the unspeakable misery brought upon others by reason of their sinnes how rich will God's glory appeare unto us when we consider that had it not been for his free grace delivering us from sinne we had been swallowed up of the same sorrowes And thus Alvarez writeth disput III. The glory of God's mercy in his elect and in like manner the manifestation of divine justice on Reprobates is truely and properly the finall cause why God did permit sinnes both in Reprobates and Angells And he proves it out of this passage of Saint Paul So Aquin 1 p. pag. 23. art 5. This is the reason saith he why God hath chosen some and Reprobated others that representation might be made of Gods goodnesse towards the Elect in the way of mercy pardoning them and on the Reprobates in the way of justice punishing them And Alphonsus Mendoza a Scotist concurres with them in this and we see they make Saint Pauls doctrine their foundation And indeed albeit at the day of judgment there will be found a vast difference between the Elect and Reprobates the one having departed this life in the state of faith repentance the other in infidelitie and impenitency in such sort as God will bestow on his elect
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
againe the word of God came to Semaiah the man of God saying speak to Rehoboā the son of Solomon King of Iudah unto all the house of Iudah Benjamin to the remnant of the people saying Thus saith the Lotd ye shall not goe up nor fight against your brethren the children ef Israel returne every man to his house for this thing is from me Here we have Gods word for it Who can deny that the hardening of Pharohs heart that he should not let Israel go the selling of Ioseph into Egypt by the hands of his unnaturall brethren came to passe by the will of God I proceed to prove the same truth by evidence of reasō First because God permits sin to come to passe as all confesse though he could hinder it if it pleased him that without all detriment to the free will of the creature why then doth he permit it but because he would have it come to passe accordingly permission is reckoned up by Schoole Divines amongst the sinnes of Gods will like as allso is Gods commandment Now what God commandeth if it be done it is said to come to passe by the will of God albeit the things that God commandeth seldome the things he permits allwayes come to passe according to the common tenet of Divines even Vostius Arminius not excepted Againe it is the common opinion of all that therefore God permits sin because he can and will worke good of it which plainly supposeth that sinne shall come to passe if God permits it consequently it must needes be the will of God it shall come to passe Thirdly it is granted on both sides that the act of sin is Gods worke in the way of an efficient cause not the outward act onely which is naturall but the inward act of the will which is morall even this as an act is the worke of God How can it be then but the deformity and vitiousnesse of the act must come to passe God willing it though not working it considering that the deformity doth necessarily follow the act in reference to the creatures working it though not in respect of Gods working it Lastly all sides agree that God can give effectuall grace whereby a man shall be preserved from sin infallibly Wherefore as often as God will not give this grace which is in his power to give doth it not manifestly follow that he will not have such a man preserved frō sin To these I added the testimony of divers as that of Austin Not any thing comes to passe unlesse Good will have it come to passe either by suffering it to come to passe or himselfe working it If good he workes it if evill permits it 't is true of each that he wills it cap. 96. It is Good saith Austin that evill should come to passe And Bellarmine himselfe so farre subscribes hereunto as by professing that It is good that evills shoul come to passe by Gods permission The same Austin confesseth that The perversity of the heart comes to passe by the secret judgment of God And againe that after a wonderfull and unspeakable manner even those things which are committed against the will of God to wit against the will of his commandment do not come to passe besides the will of God to wit the will of his purpose Anselme the most ancient of schoole Divines in his booke of the concord of foreknowledge with free will Considering saith he that what God willeth cannot but be when he wills that the will of mā shall not be constrained by any necessity to will or no and withall will have an effect follow the will of man In this case it must needs be that the will of man is free and that also which God willeth shall come to passe to wit by that will of man Now observe what in the next place he concludeth hence In these cases therefore it is true that the worke of sin which man will doe must needs be though man doth not will it of necessity And in his concord of predestination and free will In Good things God doth worke both that they are and that they are good in evill things he workes onely that they are not that they are evill Hugo de sancto Victore 1. De sacr 4. p. 13. When we say God willeth that which is good it sounds well but if we say God willeth evill it is harsh to eares neither doth a pious mind admit of the good God that he willeth evill for hereby he thinkes the meaning is that God loves and approves of that which is evill therefore the pious mind abhorres it not because that which is said is not well said but because that which is well said is not well understood To these I adde the testimony of Bradwardine at large A man reputed so pious in those dayes that the Kings prospe ous successe in those dayes was cheifly imputed unto his piety who followed him in his warres in France as Preacher in the camp In the last place I make answer to the Sophisticall arguments of Aquinas and Durandus and the frothy disputation of Valentianus all of them standing to maintaine the contrary Now let every sober Christian judge of this Authors proposition when he saith that If God doth will and procure sin c. he is worse then the Devill For I have made it evident by variety of Scripture testimonyes by reason and also with the concurrence of diverse learned Divines that it is Gods will that sin should come to passe even the horrible outrages committed against the holy sonne of God were before determined by Gods hand and counsell Now what followes herehence by this Authours dicourse but that the holy Apostles yea and the Spirit of God do make God worse then the Devill So little cause have we to be impatient when such horrible blasphemyes are layd to our charge when we consider what honourable compartners we have in these our sufferings Yet see the vanity of this consequence represented most evidently For albeit the will of Gods decree be powerfull effectuall and irresistable and consequently every thing decreed thereby shall come to passe powerfully effectually irresistibly yet this respects onely the generality of the things eveniency not the manner how For onely things necessary shall by this irresistible wil of God come to passe necessarily But as for contingent things they by the same irresistable will of God shall come to passe also but how not necessarily but contingently that is with a possibility of not comming to passe Now the free actions of men are one sort of contingent things They therefore shall infallibly come to passe also by vertue of Gods irresistible will but how Not necessarily but contingently that is with a possibility of not coming to passe in generall as they are things contingent And in speciall they shall come to passe not contingently onely but freely also that is with a free power in the
then to advance our selves into the very Throne of God's Soveraigntie and doe wee not feare least his wrath smoake us thence And if all this that hee contends for were granted him that nothing but mere necessitie were found in the motion of men's wills yet Suarez will justifie us from speaking contradiction or delivering ought that exceeds the compasse of God's omnipotencie And what if all the world were innocent yet God should not be unjust in casting the most innocent creature into hell fire as Medina professeth and that by the unanimous consent of Divines and Vasquez the Jesuite acknowledgeth this to be in the power of God as he is Lord of life and death and in the last chapter of the booke de praedestinatione gratiâ which goes under Austin's name there is an expresse passage to justifie it And albeit that worke be not Austin's yet it is lately justified to be the worke of a great follower of Austin's and as Orthodoxe as he namely the worke of Fulgentius as Raynaudus the Jesuite hath lately proved and justified that passage also together with that which is usually brought by School-Divines to prove it out of the twelfth chapter of Wisedome and shewes the right reading as followed by Austin and Gregory And withall represents a pregnant passage taken out of the fifteenth Homily of Macarius to the same purpose And out of Chrysostome in his 2. De compunctione cordis about the end thereof And out of Austin upon Psalme the seventieth about the beginning And to these he addeth Ariminensis Cameracensis Serarius and Lorinus all maintaining the same And this is evident by consideration of the power which it pleased the Lord to execute upon his holy Son and our blessed Saviour and by the power which he gives us over brute creatures This I say if all that he contends for were granted should rather be concluded therehence namely that in this case the creature should be innocent then that God should be the Authour of sinne especially considering that God performes in all this noe other thing then belongs unto him of necessitie as without which his moving of the second causes it were impossible the creature should worke at all which we have made good by shewing the manifest absurdity of their contrary doctrine who maintaine a bare concourse Divine either in subordination unto the agency of the creature or without subordinating the operation of the creature to motion Divine But we doe subordinate it as without which the second cause could not worke at all and by vertue whereof it doth worke and that freely so farre forth as liberty of will is competent to a creature but not so as to make the creature compeere with his Creatour Let man be a second free Agent but set our God that made us evermore be the first free Agent least otherwise we shall deny him the same power over his creatures that the Potter hath over the clay of the same lumpe to make one vessell unto honour and another unto dishonour This power in my maker the Lord hath given me eyes to discerne as taught us in his holy word and an heart to submit unto it and to his providence in governing my will even in the worst actions that ever were committed by me without any repining humour against his hand though I thinke it lawfull for us in an holy manner to expostulate with God sometimes in the Prophets language and say Lord why hast thou caused us to erre from thy waies and hardened our hearts against thy feare Which yet I confesse he brings to passe at noe time infundendo malitiam by infusing any malice into me who naturally have more then enough of that leaven in me but non infundendo gratiam not quickning in me that holy feare which he hath planted in me of which grace I confesse willingly I have a great deale lesse then I desire though the least measure of it is a great deale more then I doe or can deserve Neither shall I ever learne of this Authour after his manner to blaspheme God if at any time hee shall harden my heart against his feare Though this Authour speakes commonly with a full and foule mouth yet his arguments are lanke and leane and of noe substance but words As when hee saith that God over-rules men's wills by our opinion Now to overrule◠a man is to carry him in despight of his teeth Wee say noe such thing but that God moves every creature to worke agreably to it's nature necessary things necessarily contingent things contingently free Agents freely though nothing comes to passe by the free agency of any creature but what God from all eternity by his unchangable counsell hath determined to come to passe As the eleventh Article of Ireland doth professe by the unanimous consent of the ArchBishop Bishops and Clergy of that Kingdome when those Articles were made So I speake warily and circumspectly the rather because one Doctour Heylin doth in a booke intituled The History of the Sabbath professe Chapter 8. page 259. That that whole booke of Articles is now called in and in the place thereof the Articles of the Church of Ireland confirmed by Parliament in that Kingdome Anno 1631. A thing I willingly confesse at first sight seemed incredible unto mee namely that Articles of Religion agreed upon in the dayes of King Iames should be revoked in the dayes of King Charles but expect to heare the truth of that relation For the Authour thereof hath never as yet deserved so much credit at my hands as to be believed in such a particular as this But to returne this Authours text is nothing answerable to the margent For first imperare to command is one thing and to over-rule is another thing though he that doth imperare command ought is commonly accounted the Authour thereof as a cause Morall from whom comes the beginning of such a worke But utterly deny that God commands evill and the truth is wee acknowledge noe other notion of evill then such as the Apostle expresseth in calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an incongruitie to the law of God which law commands somethings and forbids other things I come to his third reason 3. I grant wicked counsellours and perswaders are deservedly accounted the Authors of sinne The common use and acception of the words as I shewed in answer to the first is observed to denote such Therefore Cicero makes Authour and disswader opposite and by law they are punishable in the same degree with the Actors But God is noe counsellour or perswader to any lewd course but forbids it and disswades it and that with denuntiation of the greatest judgments among trangressours 2. I willingly confesse that councelling is farre inferiour to enforcing yet in Scripture phrase earnest intreaty or command is oftentimes exprest by compelling as Mat 14. 22. Mark 6. 45. Luk 14. 23. Gala 6. 12 and 2. 14. 1 Sam 28. 23. 2 Chron 21. 11. And noe marvaile
abstaine from sinne when such a grace is granted him and consequently in granting such a grace he permits him still to sinne as well as in denying it and in denying he permits him to doe good as much as in granting it So that still it is not God that keepeth a man from sinne as often as he abstaineth from it but merely the power of his own free will Whereby it is evident that this Authour as well denies that God is the Authour of any good as that he is the Authour of any evill But man is Authour of the one as well as of the other The power of doing good he will grant is from God neither can it be denied but that the power of doing evill is from God He will grant likewise that God is ready to concurre to any good act if man will and I presume he will not deny but that God concurres also to the substance of every evill act The only difference that remaines is this God perswades only to good and disswades only that which is evill Now this third and last assertion we grant as well as he Yet he layes to our charge that we make God the Authour of evill but cares not at all how he denies God to be the Authour of any good in the actions of men and makes noe place for any grace save such as is hortatory which is performed usually by the ministery of men Yet consider what Bradwardine sometimes Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Elect hath written in this kind before Luther or Calvin were borne The title of the fourth chapter of his second booke is this That free will being tempted cannot of his own strength without the helpe of God and his grace overcome any temptation Of the first this that free will strengthned with what created grace soever cannot without another speciall succour of God overcome any temptation of the sixth this that That speciall succour of God is the unconquerable grace of God Of the seventh this That no man though not tempted can by the strength of his free will alone without created grace or with created grace how great soever it be without the speciall asistance of God avoide any sin all these propositions he demonstrates with variety of argument Behold the ingenuity of this Authour He flies in the face of Calvin and Beza and other our Divines for maintaining that unlesse God by his grace keep and preserve a man effectually from sinning it cannot be that he should abstaine from sinne Bradwardine maintained the same before any of these were borne yet he saith nothing to him le ts all his arguments alone but upbraides us for maintaining the same doctrine without giving any reason to convict us of our errour Adde to this which I have omitted the Corolary of that seventh chapter in Bradwardin formerly mentioned is this That it is the will of God which preserves them that are tempted from falling and them that are not tempted both from temptation and from sinne Not one of the arguments whereby he confirmes any of these positions doth this Authour goe about to answer In like manner Alvarez Positâ permissione divinâ infallibiliter peccat homo upon supposition of God's permission man sins infallibly The proposition he intends to prove in that disputation is this Therefore a man is not converted because he is not aided of God But both he and we deny that hereupon a man sinneth necessarily alwaies but only in some cases In some cases it followeth as namely a man borne in sinne and in the state of corruption the naturall fruits whereof are infidelity and impenitency untill God affords a man the grace of regeneration he cannot believe he cannot repent They that are in the flesh cannot please God Thou after the hardnesse of thy heart that cannot repent Therefore they could not believe In which case God is not the cause of infidelity and impenitency but these proceed naturally and necessarily from that originall corruption wherein they are conceived and borne God is only the naturall cause why this their naturall corruption continues uncured For none can cure it but God it being a work nothing inferior to the raising of them from the dead Yet he is no culpable cause of this For as much as he is not bound to any but he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth So that necessarily without the grace of regeneration every man continueth in his naturall corruption devoyd of faith of hope and love These being supernaturall and whereunto no man can attaine with out supernaturall grace In like manner hence it followeth that no naturall man can performe any morall good act in a gracious acceptable manner in the sight of God because â—he fountaines of such performances are not found in naturall men But they have a free power as to commit any naturall evill worke so to abstaine from it though not in a gracious manner Free power as to abstaine from any vertuous act so to performe it also though not in a gracious manner They may be temperate chast just and the like but their vertuous actions are not truly vertues in a Christian account because they know not God nor Christ much lesse doe they believe in him and performe these vertuous actions out of their love unto him If Maccovius and Whitaker and Pareus be of the same mind and the Dominicans with them and Bradwardine before them all let the indifferent Reader consider what an hungry opposition is made by this Authour not offering to answer any one of their Arguments nor of mine neither in my Vindiciae Nor saith ought by way of reply upon any answer to the like argument of Arminius The resolution of all that here he delivers determining in a rule himselfe proposeth without reason or authority to justifie it A rule as here it is applyed conteining a notorious untruth For causa deficiens in no case can be efficiens in proper speech any more then causa efficiens can be accounted deficiens unlesse it be understood in divers kinds As for example efficiens naturaliter may be deficiens moraliter and deficiens moraliter may be efficiens naturaliter An efficient cause naturally may be deficient morally and so a cause deficient morally may be efficient naturally Least of all can it have place in the present question which is of the cause of sinne For sinne as sinne evill as evill non habet causam efficientem sed deficientem hath no cause efficient but deficient only as Austin hath long agoe determined and it is a rule generally received and never that I know denied of any Againe causa deficiens in necessariis may be culpable I confesse and so interpretativè as they say may be interpreted to be as good as an efficient As in a civill consideration it is said of the Magistrate that Qui non vetat peccare cum possit jubet He that forbiddeth not a man to sinne when it
a thing it is for any man to maintaine that there is some cause of predestination as touching the act of God predestinating So as mad a thing it must be every way to avouch that there is a cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating And truely the Apostle St. Paul plainly manifests that upon what ground he proves that Election is not of good works namely because before Iacob or Esau were borne or had done good or evill it was said The elder shall serve the younger upon the same ground we may be bold to conclude that Reprobation is not of evill workes And the same reason manifests that faith and infidelity are excluded from being the causes the one of Election the other of Reprobation as well as good and evill workes And both Piscator by evidence of Scripture and Bradwardine by evidence of reason have demonstrated that no will of God is conditionall which is to be understood as touching the act of God willing And it may be evidently further demonstrated thus If any thing be the cause of God's will then either by necessity of nature or by the constitution of God Not by necessity of nature as is evident and all confesse there being no colour of truth for that besides such an opinion were most dangerously prejudiciall to God's soveraignty and liberty If therefore they say it is by the constitution of God maske I pray what an insuperable absurdity followeth hereupon For seing God's constitution is his will it followeth that God did will that upon foresight of this or that he would will such a man's salvation and such a man's damnation And thus the act of God's will is made the Object of God's will even the eternall act of God's will Whereas to the contrary it is apparent that the objects of God's will are things temporall never any thing that is eternall But as touching things willed we readily grant it may be said there is a cause thereof as School-Divines doe generally acknowledge And thus Gerardus Vossius speaks of the conditionall will which he faith the Fathers doe ascribe to God For this is the instance which he gives thereof as for example when God ordaines to bestow salvation on a man in case he believe here faith is made the condition of Salvation but not of the will of God And in like manner we willingly grant that reprobation is conditionall inasmuch as God intends to inflict damnation on none but such as die in sin without repenance But albeit predestination as touching this particular thing willed may be said to be conditionall according as the School-men explicate their meaning and reprobation likewise as touching the particular of dānatiō mētioned yet no such thing cā be truely affirmed either of the one or of the other as touching the particulars of grāting or denying the grace of règeneratiō which are intended also by the decrees of predestinatiō reprobatiō For albeit God intends not to bestow salvation on any but upon condition of faith nor damnation on any but upon condition of finall impenitency and infidelity Yet God intends not to bestow the grace of regeneration on some for the curing of their naturall infidelity and impenitency Nor to leave the same infidelity and impenitency uncured in others by denying the same grace of regeneration unto them This I say God doth not intend to bring to passe upon any condition For if he should then grace should be conferred according unto works which was condemned in the Synod of Palestine and all along in divers Synods and Councells against the Pelagians So that albeit God proceeds according to a law in bestowing salvation and inflicting damnation yet he proceeds according to no law in giving or denying the grace of regeneration for the curing of our naturall corruption but merely according to the pleasure of his will as the Apostle testifies saying He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And if the conferring and denying of this grace be absolute how much more are the decrees hereof to be accounted most absolute And consequently that one man is delivered from the power of his sins whether originall or habituall another is not but still continueth under the power of them This I say doth must needs come to passe by vertue of Gods absolute decrees Yet no absolute necessity followeth hereupon First because no greater necessity then that which is absolute can be attributed to the existence and continuance of God himselfe Secondly God did absolutely decree to make the world yet no wise man was ever known to affirme that the worlds existence was and is by absolute necessity In like sort God did absolutely decree that Iosiah should burne the Prophets bones upon the Altar That Cyrus should build his Citty and let goe his captives That no man should desire the Israelites land when they should come to appeare before the Lord their God thrice in the yeare That God would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their children to love the Lord their God withall their heart and with all their soule To put his feare in their hearts that they should never depart away from him To cause them to walke in his statutes and judgments to doe them To worke in them both the will and the deed according to his good pleasure Yea to worke in them every thing that is pleasing in his sight through Iesus Christ Likewise that Absolom should defile his fathers Concubines that the Jewes should crucify the Son of God that some through disobedience should stumble at the word that the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast Yet these actions were done by them as freely as ever they did ought in their lives All these things I say by Scripture evidence were decreed by God to come to passe The good by God's effection the evill by God's permission and decreed absolutely on their parts that did them if not let it be shewed upon what condition on Absolon's part he should defile his fathers Concubines upon what condition on the Jewes part they should crucify the Son of God upon what condition on their part others through disobedience should stumble at God's word And upon what condition on their part the Kings should give their kingdomes to the beast And if they take Arminias his way let them reply upon mine answere to Arminius if Bellarmin's let them reply upon my answer to Bellarmine that we may not trouble the world with out Tautologies If a different way from both these I shall be glad to be acquainted with it give it such entertainement as according to my judgment it shall be found to deserve So that with Epiphanius though we are ready to concurre in denying destiny which as before we heard out of him was a necessity derived from the starres yet with Austin we may still hold that the wills of men need not to be exempted from all necessity to maintaine the liberty
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
by the opposition of it to obduration which is such as whereupon followeth disobedience as appeares by the objection following hereupon Thou wilt say then why doth yet cōplaine For who hath resisted his will Now God complaineth of nothing but disobedience Againe to give faith is to shew mercy For to have faith is to obtaine mercy Heretofore ye have not believed but now have obtained mercy through their unbeliefe Where to believe to obtaine mercy are made equipollent of the same signification And in reason if God did deny faith because of some unpreparednesse in the creature then God did expect that the creature should first prepare himselfe and make himselfe fit for faith that so God might bestow it upon him so grace should be conferr'd according to workes which is contradictious to expresse testimony of holy scripture testifying that God hath saved us called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose and grace all along hath beene condened in the Church of God for Pelagianisme Thus we have beene entertained with a discourse containing nothing but the opinion of our Divines which none of us deny Yet in the proposing hereof he hath wasted a whole leafe and more Now he comes to his argument drawen from these two layd together 1. That God did bring men into a necessity of sinning 2. That he hath left the reprobates under this necessity Hence he concludes that God is the Author of the reprobates sins But this we utterly deny Therefore this he undertakes to prove by two reasons 1. Because the cause of the cause is the cause of its effect if there be a necessary subordination betweene the causes and the effect 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 For answer whereunto I say first begining with the minor 1. That the want of supernaturall grace is not the immediate cause of the sinnes of Reprobates nor the cheife cause much lesse the sole cause And I prove it evidently Let instance be given in any sinne committed by a Reprobate let it be the sinne of murther or of fornication or of theft or of lying For if it were then every reprobate should be guilty of murther of fornication of lying of stealing For positâ causâ principali immediatâ ponitur effectus Where a principall and immediate cause doth exist there the effect must needs exist But it is apparent that albeit every reprobate doth want supernaturall grace yet every reprobate is not guilty of murther of fornication lying and stealing Secondly If the want of supernaturall grace were the immediate and principall cause of all the sinnes of reprobates then not only every Reprobate should be guilty of committing all the sinnes formerly mentioned but at all times every one of these sinnes should be committed by them Because at all times they want supernaturall grace And the truth is every one of these sinnes may be abstained from without supernaturall grace and for carnall respects Only without supernaturall grace they cannot be abstained from in a gracious manner as namely out of faith in God and love to God He that hath neither faith nor love cannot abstaine from these vile courses out of faith and love In like sort heathen men in their generations have beene exceeding vertuous according to the worlds account of vertue in moderating their passions and ordering their conversation aright one towards another and all this hath beene performed by them without supernaturall grace Thirdly The immediate cause of all their sinnes rather of the two is their naturall corruption whereby they are habitually turned away from God and converted unto the creature in an inordinate manner Like as the immediate cause actionis laesae of a naturall function of the body imperfect is the disease or infirmity that hath seised upon some part of the body And the Physitian who is able to cure it and will not is the cause why it continueth uncured But no wise man will say he is the cause why this or that member in a sicke mans body doth not performe its operation as it should In like manner as touching the vicious actions of the soule the want of supernaturall grace is the cause why those vicious actions continue uncured because God alone by his grace can cure them but no sober man that is well in his wits should say that is the cause of vicious actions but acknowledge rather the corruption thereof to be the cause of these vicious actions And indeed all morall philosophy referres the cause of every vicious action unto the vicious habit depraving the will and inclining it to vicious courses Fourthly Yet farther to represent the wildnesse of this Authours discourse The vicious habit it selfe is not the sole cause no nor the principall and immediate cause of a vicious action in particular For if it were then that particular vicious action should alwayes be committed by it So that an impure person should alwayes commit fornication a Lyar should alwayes lye a Theife should alwayes steale a Murtheret should alwayes commit murther For it is a rule generally received that the immediate and principall cause being existent the effect must needs exist also And indeed albeit habits whether good or evill do worke after the manner of nature inclining and swaying the will to the accomplishment of them Yet the will of man being a free and not necessary Agent proceeds not to worke but according unto judgement and occasions and opportunityes from without And albeit a purser that maintaine himselfe by robbery hath a faire opportunity offered him to advantage himselfe to take a purse yet if upon consideration he finds himselfe too weake to goe through with it or that he cannot do it safely he will forbeare For albeit a vicious habit doth naturally and necessarily incline him to a naughty end yet in the choice of the meanes conducing to this end he is free How much more plainely doth it appeare that the want of supernaturall grace is farre off from being either the sole cause or the immediate or the principall cause of any sinne committed by a Reprobate Rather of the two the intestine corruption of the Reprobate is the cause of his sinnes and the want of grace is the cause why this corruption is not cured Now albeit a Physitian may sinne in not curing a sicke person when it lyes in his power to cure him For we are in charity bound to do to others as we would have others do unto us yet God is bound to none I will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion 2. Observe how sluttishly he carryeth himselfe in the next reason taken from removens prohibens His rule proceeds both of withdrawing and withholding a thing which being
but that to him sinne is to be imputed when it is done by Tertullians rule approved by this Authour quite contrary to the judgment and doctrine of Austin putting this difference betweene man and God the creature and the Creator that if we suffer others to sinne when we can hinder them rei cum ipsis erimus but how many sinnes sayth he do we see committed in the world which could never come to passe if God would hinder them Shewing how our doctrine opposeth Gods mercy according to his conceit and coming to deliver things more closely as he sayth and comprehending that which he hath to say under 4. particulars The 2. whereof this That it was the sinne of our nature not by generation as I have shewed but by Gods owne voluntary imputation The proofe whereof and the confirmation of it out of M. Calvin being set downe at large in some 13. lines or more in M. Hords discourse is here utterly left out which will be the more remarkable by comparing it with what he delivers concerning another attribute of God here inserted and which he pretends also to be impugned by our doctrine p. 54. where he seemes to sup up that which here he delivered Num. 3. These words are inserted I thinke I may conclude with the words of Prosper He which sayth that God would not have all men to be saved but a certaine set number of predestinate persons only he speaketh more harshly then he should of the height of Gods unsearchable grace Nay he speakes that which cannot stand with his infinite grace and mercy especially to the sonnes of men The 8. objection of the Galles was this That God will not have all men to be saved but a certaine number of persons predestinate Now Prospers answer hereunto is very large and it begines thus If about the salvation of all mankind and calling them unto the knowledge of his truth the will of God is maintained to be so indifferent throughout all ages that God may be shewed to have neglected no man altogether the unsearchable depth of Gods judgement is hereby assaulted For why did God suffer all nations in ages past to walke in their owne wayes when the Lord chose Iacob to himselfe and dealt not so with every nation And why are they now become Gods people which before were no people of God c All this makes nothing for this Authour The next is directly against him not only at large but in this very particular wherein he alleadeth Prosper not in his answer to this 8. objection but in his sentence proposed afterwards upon it For what is this Authours meaning in citeing him to affirme that God not only willeth their salvation whom he hath predestinated but all men also or at least that such as say the contrary do speake more harshly then we ought to speaks of the depth of Gods inscrutable grace but to cast a colour that Prosper concurres with him and judgeth that God is indifferunt to save all But the reason why he only saves some and not others is because some prepare themselves for grace and accordingly he bestowes it upon them Others do not prepare themselves and accordingly God doth not bestow it upon them Now prosper directly contests against all such as maintaine this opinion and that in two particulars 1. In taking upon them to give the reason of Gods judgements and that drawen from the wills and actions of men and which is no lesse impiety in thinking that grace is bestowed by way of reward for good workes Or restrayned from men by reason of their evill workes His words translated run thus But whosoever referreth the causes of Gods workes and judgements throughout to the wills and actions of men and will have Gods dispensations varied according to the changeable condition of mans free will such a one professeth the judgements of God to be scrutable and his wayes such as may be found out And that which Paul the Doctor of the Gentiles durst not touch this man thinkes he can unlock and make known And that which is a fruit of no lesse impiety the very grace of God whereby we are saved is given by the way of reward for good workes and denyed or restrained for evill workes So that in each particular Prosper is directly contrary this Authours tenet Now seeing the most part of men have not the grace of salvation that is such a grace as is of saving nature And the reason by God doth not give it them is not in consideration of their evill workes let any other sober and judicious Aminian be judge whether God can be sayd to will their salvation in such a sense as we speake of it when he denyeth them the grace of salvation and that not for their evill workes sake but which necessarily followeth hereupon meerely according to the good pleasure of his will And indeed in Prospers large answer to this eighth objectionto the Galles which taketh up almost a whole columne in Austin this Authour finds nothing at all to fasten upon for his advantage But yet you will say in his eighth sentence which he proposeth it is as this authour alleadgeth I grant it but observe his censure well The inscrutable depth of Gods grace may suffice to keep us from speaking so rashly as to say that God wills not all to be saved but only a certaine number of persons predestinate Where observe first he counts it an harsh speech to say that God willeth not that all men shall be saved the reason whereof undoutedly is this because it is expresly contradictory to a text in Scripture But then if we object how can God be sayd to will their salvation whom he hath not predestinated to whom he will not give the grace of salvation that not for their evill workes sake but according to the meere pleasure of his will Now Prospers answer in my judgement is this The depth of Gods inscrutable grace will beare us out in it so that we need not cast our selves upon so harsh an expression as to deny that God will have all men to be saved which is contradictious to the letter of Gods word In effect it is as if he should say It is a secret This I take to be Prospers meaning and herein I remit my selfe to the judicious But sure I am that Prosper is directly contrary to that opinion whereunto this Authour by vertue of this sentence of his desires to draw him In like manner the Authour of the booke De vocatione Gentium which is commonly thought to be Prospers though Vossius affects to entitle it unto another upon no other ground but because he conceits that Authour not to be so rigorous in the doctrine of predestination as Prosper But let the judicious compare Prospers cariage in this particular with that Authours and observe whether they do not exactly agree For that Authour holds up that text of Paul God will have all to be
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
disposing causes of their election unto salvation But you proceed and I am content to go along with you 3. And this reason especially for the latter part of it which concernes the manifestation of Gods glory per mâ—dum justitiae punientis may be farther confirmed thus That which tends not to Gods glory simply but onely upon supposition if sinne be could not be intended by him simply but onely upon that supposition For so farre and no farther doth God intend any thing as it makes for his glory But to punish men or any other creatures is a thing that tends not to Gods glory simply but onely upon supposition if sinne be Ergo it could not be intended by God simply but onely upon that supposition Resp You need not have mentioned the tending of this to Gods glory your argument is in force and greater force without it For I hold that to punish without supposition of sinne implyeth contradiction paena being properly opposed to praemium and as reward formally hath a respect to obedience going before so hath punishment unto sinne 1. Now first to follow you in your owne course I reason thus That which tends to Gods glory not simply but onely upon supposition of obedience in faith repentance and good workes cannot be intended by him simply but upon that supposition but to reward with salvation and everlasting life tends not to Gods glory simply but onely upon supposition of faith repentance and good workes Ergo it could ot be intended by God simply but onely upon faith and repentance 2. But to your Major I answer No man saith that God doth intend to punish any man but for sinne Now hereupon many not onely Arminians but some Orthodox also are apt to be deceived and to thinke that these words but for sinne are to be referred to the Antecedent removed which is Gods intention But it is not so those words are onely to be referred to the Antecedent next before which is to punish And I prove it thus When any man saith God intends to punish man for his sinne the meaning can be no other than if he had said God doth intend that punishment shall be inflicted on man for his sinne where it is manifest that sinne is noted onely as going before the punishment not as going before Gods intention But as soone as this confusion of sense is opened by distinction then they flye to this kind of argument sinne goeth before the execution of punishment therefore the consideration of sinne goeth before the intention of punishment which is the argument I formerly proposed and the inconsequence whereof I presume you doe manifestly perceive Now to that which followeth 4. Although the reason which you alledge on our behalfe be inconsequent as you have framed it yet I suppose it may be reduced to a true Syllogisme thus The decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne election is the decree of liberation from sinne Ergo election presupposeth sinne If you deny the Major I prove it thus That which presupposeth sinners presupposeth sinne The decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinners Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne you will perhaps yet deny the Minor but I prove it thus The decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth some that have need to be delivered for else it were vaine and to no purpose Onely sinners have need to be delivered from sinne Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinners The like argument and in the like forme may be framed touching the decree of dereliction in sinne Or if you take reprobation for the decree of damnation it may be said thus The decree of damnation presupposeth some persons justly damnable for otherwise it were either an unjust or at least and unwisean indeliberate decree But onely sinners are justly damnable Ergo the decree of damnation presupposeth sinners and conse quently sinne For peccatum is de formali ratione peccatoris qua peccator est as you know Resp Every one indeed knowes that peccatum is de formali ratione peccatoris and hereupon it is manifest that the second Syllogisme gives no mite of proofe unto the first For seeing formalis ratio of any thing cannot be separated from the thing it selfe and consequently neither peccatum from peccator you may easily perceive that when we deny that the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne we must therewithall necessarily deny that it presupposeth sinners Your third Syllogisme addeth as little force unto the former being meerly identica probatio For every man knoweth that to be a sinner and to have need to be delivered from sinne is all one in such sort as whatsoever is denyed of a sinner must be denyed of him that hath need to be delivered from sinne forasmuch as every sinner hath need to be delivered from sinne Thus while you decline that proofe which in my observation alone hath course and the implication whereof in the Major proposition is all the evidence of it you fall upon no sound proofe at all The truth is if you observe you may perceive your Major proposition involves this Enthymeme Liberation from sinne presupposeth sinne sinners such as have need to be delivered from sinne Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne presupposeth both sinne and sinners and such as need to be delivered from sinne Of any other force of proofe that you give I am not conscious 2. If the argument formed touching the decree of dereliction in sinne be of the like forme it will admit no doubt the same answer 3. The Major of the last Syllogisme hath a clause annexed unto it as a reason of it thus else it were in vaine and to no purpose If this reason pleased you you might have relyed upon it in the first Syllogisme of the three whereas now you may perceive they containe no proofe but identicall 2. Your course of argumentation tends to prove that it is impossible it should be otherwise than you conceive which is more than to say it were otherwise onely vaine and to no purpose Thirdly I answer that which is vaine and to no purpose is either to no end or to no good end But the decree of liberation from sinne whether it presuppose sinne as you say or not presuppose sinne as I say still it tends to the same end and that a good end to wit the manifestation of Gods mercy But I erre your meaning seemeth to be this it is vaine in respect that it cannot obtaine the end it aimes at unlesse it presuppose sinne But how doe you prove that Gods decree of liberation from sinne cannot take effect except it presuppose sinne you have no meanes to prove it but this Liberation from sinne cannot take effect without it presuppose sinne Ergo the decree of liberation from sinne cannot take effect without it presuppose sinne And while you decline this way of proofe you light upon no proofe at all 4. Touching your last Syllogisme
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
their p. 47 l. 2 praeoptat l. 23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 48 l. 5 6 degree l. 8 degree of diminution l 10 any paine p. 49. l. 18 my argument p. 50. l. 7 in this l. 22 will p. 51. l. 22 the corrupt p 53. l. 33. permittente Deo p 55 l. 1 But God by this opinion doth will and procure it by a powerfull and effectuall decree which cannot be resisted p. 56 l. 5 this will l 53 signes of p. 57 l 8 God p. 59 l. 9 of Thomas p. 60 l 16 as holily p. 61 l. 45 is just p. 62. l. 4 restraines ib l. 14 good works l. 22 that therefore God l. 28. double evill l. 48 for it by p. 63 l. 5 Potan p. 64 l. 7 efficacy of l 16 supposition l. 18 necessarily but either necessarily or c. l. 19 supposition l. 24 of Aquinas l. 26 on Gods Marg pro culpa p. 65. l. 34 quotation l. 45 to feare l. 48. emortui sarmenti quia Christo resecti sunt l. 49 multi p. 66 l. 7 saith not l. 12 nill that l. 25 futurition l. 47 from sin l. 56 or whither he abstaine from that which is evill he doeth not abstaine from it in a gracious manner p. 67 l. 12 this of l. 24 you hearts l. 51. mans infidelity p. 68 l. 57. manner of appointing hereunto for if they be at all appointed hereunto undoubtedly they are precisely appointed thereunto p. 69 l. 12 supposition p. 70 l. 28 second way p. 73 l. 24 as we l. 44 severally p. 74 l. 46 author of the Sin l. 48 del good p. 76. l. 13 will not p. 78. l. 3 futurition l. 29 procure l. 30 as a second p 80 l. 12 of England l. 22 but we l. 31 against l. 38 if he should worke them contrary to their natures then c. p. 81 l. 7 effecting p. 83 l. 29 of sin p. 84 l. 24 acts p. 85 l. 1 any naturall act l. 50 mere pleasure as the apostle professeth that God hath mercy on whom he will it is evident that God of his mere pleasure c. p. 86 l. 18 as uncapable p. 89. l. 59 nec recte p 93 l. 30 will doe p. 94 l. 2 nill it p. 97 l. 36 the cause l. 54. my answer p. 100 l. 44 with their p 102 l. 56 and that p. 104 l. 4 Credible p 105 l 2 agent p. 118 l. 41 or vitious p. 121 l. 41 will of p. 127 l. 14 of destiny p. 134 l. 44 asserâ—oribus l. 47 quin author l. 50 I propose p. 140 l. 21 so as to come to passe p 146 l. 22 pillar had not l. 23 del pillar had p. 147 l ult why God p. 151 l. 38 so p. 157 l. 7 without which p. 164 l. 56 it may p. 186 l. 47 decrees p. 193 l. 2 wherein 't is manifest that finall perseverance in sin goeth before l. 3 But if you farther proceed to make it good according to your usuall course thus finall perseverance in sin goeth before damnation Ergo c p 195 l. 35 mine l. 54 decrees p. 198 l. 36 is in p. 199 l 10 and some l. 11. privatively A VINDICATION OF Dr. TWISSE FROM THE EXCEPTIONS OF M r JOHN GOODWIN IN HIS Redemption Redeemed BY HENRY IEANES Minister of Gods Word in Chedzoy OXFORD Printed for T. Robinson 1653. TO THE Reverend and Learned Mr IOHN GOODWIN SIR I Have assumed so much boldnesse as to examine some passages that you have in your Booke entituled Redemption Redeemed against D. Twisse wherein I believe that you your selfe will acknowledg that I have carried my selfe as a fair adversary as an adversary only unto your opinions and not unto your person which I love honour as in other respects so for the good and great gifts and parts God hath bestowed on you Many of my friends have earnestly disswaded me from this vindicatioÌ„ assuring me that I must expect from you insteed of a reply nothing but a libell But for my part I shall hope and pray unto the Almighty for better things of you However I am not hereby deterred from entring into the lists with you However I am not hereby deterred from entring into the lists with you neither shall I deprecate your utmost severity in rationall argumentation for the discovery of any thing that you conceive to be weake and unsound in this my discourse You may perhaps think and say that so small a trifle is unworthy a diversion from your more serious employments but for that I am contented that the learned Reader judge betwixt us Indeed I had long ere this finished an answer unto your whole Book but that there was a generall and as I think a just expectation that some in the University of Cambridge who dissented from you would comply with your faire invitation of them to declare themselves in some worthy and satisfactory answer to the particulars propounded in your Book But upon their long silence which I can neither excuse nor will I accuse as being altogether ignorant of the causes thereof I renewed my thoughts of setting about this worke and intended in the interim to have annexed to this piece of D. Twisse a Table referring unto such passages in this and other of his Books as doe in great part satisfy whatsoever you have delivered in your forementioned Treatise in opposition unto the absolutenesse of Divine Reprobation But from these resolutions I was quite taken off by certain information that the Learned M. Kendall heretofore Fellow of Exeter Colledge in the University of Oxford hath undertaken you But I detaine you and the reader too long with Prefacing I shall therefore presently without more adoe addresse my selfe unto the encounter with you In three places you except against D. Twisse I shall consider them severally To begin with the first M r GOODWIN p. 25. 26. c. 2. §. 20. IT is indeed the judgement of some Learned men that the purpose or intent of God to permit or suffer such or such a thing to be done or such or such an accident to come to passe supposeth a necessity at least a syllogisticall or consequentiall necessity of the coming of it to passe But that the truth lieth on the other side of the way appears by the light of this consideration If whatsoever God hath decreed or intendeth to permit to come to passe in any case upon any termes or any supposition whatsoever should by vertue of such an intention or decree necessarily come to passe then all things possible to be or at least ten thousand things more than ever shall be must be yea and this necessarily For doubtlesse God hath decreed and intendeth to leave naturall causes generally to their naturall and proper operations and productions yea and voluntary causes also under a power and at liberty to act ten thousand things more then ever they will doe or shall doe For example God intendeth and hath decreed to permit that fire
have existed or shall exist for the future but also all that are in any possibility of existence whose existence implyeth no contradiction And that your satisfaction unto this may be the fuller and distincter I shall branch it into some particulars which I shall entreat you to cleare up unto me First there are many things that are meerely possible numberlesse millions of men and Angells which have not never had never shall have actuall existence and unto these there is possible as great a variety of both actions and sufferings which that God hath decreed to permit to come to passe conditionally in some case upon some termes upon some supposition or other is not I confesse within the compasse of my Creed but yet I shall be willing to be instructed by you provided that you prove what you undertake to teach me Now that I am not much to be blamed for making a doubt of this will I hope be confessed by you if you please to consider First that Didacus Alvarez a very learned man holds it to be the more probable opinion that there are not in God conditionall decrees concerning all future conditionall contingents which may be framed by our understandings in infinite combinations as well concerning things actually existent as also things possible but only in comparison of those future conditionalls which are revealed by God Christ or the Prophets c. And he insinuates this reason out of Ledesma because other conditionall decrees would be in vaine impertinent and no waies conducing unto Gods providence and government of the World which reason is as well applyable unto conditionall permissive as conditionall effective decrees M. Rutherford I know argueth somewhat against this but I believe you will not plow with his Heifer Secondly that D. Twisse not only affirmeth but proveth that things meerely possible are not the object of Gods decree in his Book against Iackson p. 283. 333. 394. Looke we saith he upon the decrees of men the wisest of men were they ever known to decree that a thing may be done But rather supposing many things may be done they make choyce to decree the doing of such courses as seeme most convenient things are possible without any reference to the decrees of God but only in reference to his power That is possible unto God which he can doe or which he hath power to cause that it be brought to passe As for example before the World was made it was possible that the World should be made was this by vertue of Gods decree Did God decree it to be possible If he did seeing his decrees are free it followeth that he might have chosen whether the World should have been possible or no. His arguments are applyable unto Gods permissive as well as effective decrees unto his conditionall as well as absolute decrees From agents meerely possible passe we on unto such as doe exist in some difference of time or other and unto them some things are possible only in regard of an obedientiall power some things are possible in regard of a naturall power First some things are possible and that unto all sorts of second agents only in regard of an obedientiall power thus 't is possible for ten thousand Asses besides Balaam's to speake for ten thousand peices of iron besides that mentioned 2 Kings 6. to swimme 't is possible for wine to be made of ten thousand pots of water c. Besides those sixe we read of Iohn 2. It is possible of stones to have children raised up unto Abraham Now that God hath decreed to permit all things thus possible to come to passe conditionally in some case is as I take it false and I shall give you my reason out of D. Twisse his Digression De naturà permissionis lib. 2. part 2. pag. 16. col 2. Irrationalia dicuntur permitti quoties sinuntur ferri secundùm naturam suam quemadmodum cum lapis sinitur ferri deorsum ignis sinitur grassari in domas hominum itaque circa agentia naturalia dum versatur permissio palam est praesupponi non modo propensionem sed determinationem ad agendum non sic quoties versatur circa agentia rationalia nam rationales substantiae quando permittuntur agere sinuntur etiam ferri secundum naturam suam aut alia esset ratio permissionis rerum rationalium quam irrationalium quod minime videtur Irrationall agents are said to be permitted as often as they are suffered to be carryed according to their natures as when a stone is suffered to move downeward fire to rage upon the howses of men So also rationall substances when they are permitted to act they are suffered to be moved or carryed agreeably unto their natures quoties permittuntur sibi pro domesticae inclinationis ratione quà libet feruntur ib. pag. 11. c. 1. or otherwise the nature of the permission of things rationall and irrationall would differ in regard of forme where as the difference between them is only in respect of the matter about which each is conversant as he sheweth presently after the words quoted Againe of those things which are possible unto all sorts and kinds of agents there are some which God hath absolutely decreed to effect or bring to passe by his operation some which he hath absolutely decreed to hinder or restraine Now whatsoever God worketh or effecteth he doth not permit as permission is opposed unto effection and therefore it cannot be the object of a bare permissive decree but of an operative or effective Secondly what he hindereth or restraineth either immediately by himselfe or mediately by second causes he cannot be at all said to permit and therefore he never decreed to permit it more briefely God cannot be said to decree the bare and naked permission of that whose effection or working he hath decreed he cannot be said to decree the permission of that whose hinderance or restraint he hath intended but of things possible he hath decreed the effection of some the restraint and hinderance of others and therefore there are many things possible which he hath not decreed barely to permit I but perhaps you will say that though whatsoever God hath absolutely decreed to effect or hinder he hath not decreed to permit to come to passe absolutely yet he hath decreed it shall come to passe conditionally in such cases upon such termes and upon such a supposition But this is spoken gratis and therefore I doe beseech you to evidence it by dint of argument unto which if convincing I hope I shall submit But I imagine I see a back-doore at which you intend to runne away and save your selfe the labour of medling with that worke which I have here cut out for you and that is the clause which you have added by way of Parenthesis in your consequent or at least ten thousand things more than ever shall be Here your consequent hath two propositions in it one universall then all things possible
naturaliter scire desiderat quare cum per partem proximam habeat voluntatem universaliter efficacem posset illa scire non novitèr quia tunc non semper esset actualissimus scientissimus perfectissimus beatissimus immutailis penitus contra tertiam partem sextam necessario ergo aeternalitèr omnia vera novit Thirdly from his unchangeablenesse which is affirmable of all his other Attributes and consequently of his knowledge But now his knowledge if it were not of things whilest they were to come it would by actuall existence of them be enlarged and so changed This argument is urged by Durand Cumel Rada Suarez and others God knowes thing whiles present for otherwise he should be ignorant of that which men and Angells know therefore he knew them whiles future otherwise by the presence of them something de novo should accrue unto Gods knowledge which cannot be without a change Suarez also argueth to the same purpose The last sort of arguments which I shall mention are drawn from Gods actuall providence or efficiency God is the cause of all things of him saith the Apostle are all things Rom. 11. 36. Now he is the cause of all things by his knowledge and by his will First by his knowledge and that practicall which is resembled unto that of an Artificer who hath a foreknowledge of what artificiall workes he resolves upon for he hath samplers and patterns of them in his mind Rada propounds this argument very briefely Secondly the will of God is the cause of all things as is demonstrated by Bradwardine and by Aquinas and such as Comment upon him in prim part Q. 19. Art 4. Now the will of God is unchangeable from within and irresistible from without and therefore in it all things future may be certainly and infallibly foreknowne Bradwardine from Esay 46. 10. Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times the things that are not yet done saying my Counsell shall stand inferres the infallibility of Gods prediction from the firmenesse immutability and unresistiblenesse of his will The Prophet signifies saith he that he can therefore declare the things that are not done because his Counsell shall stand and he will doe all his pleasure Quasi velit innuere quod per hoc annuntiet vei annuntiare possit ab exordio novissimum quia omne suum consilium volunt as immutabiliter stabit siet De causa Dei lib. 1. cap. 218. pag. 224. This argument Cumel inforceth by comparison with mans foreknowledge of things in their causes A Mathematician can foreknow an Eclipse of the Sunne or Moone in its cause and therefore much more can God foreknow all future contingents in the determination of his own will As for the testimonies you bring in the Margent they and diverse others are alleadged generally by the Dominicans to prove the existence of things in Eternity and it is very strange unto me that you take no notice of the common answers that are usually given unto them The place out of Gregory is misquoted but that might be an escape of the Printer in my booke it is Moral lib. 20. cap. 25. And a little after he gives the reason why prescience is not properly in God Praescire dicitur qui unamquamque rem antequam veniat videt Et id quod futurum est priusquam praesens fiat praevideâ— Deus ergo quomodo est praescius dum nulla nisi quae futura sunt praesciantur Et scimâ—â— quia Deo futurum nihil est ante cujus oculos praeterita nulla sunt praesentia non transeunt futura non veni uni Quippe quia omne quod nobis fuit erit in ejus prospectu praesto est Et omne quod praesensest scire potest potius quam praescire The ground upon which both Austin and Gregory deny foreknowledge to be in God is because nothing is future but all things are present unto God Unto all these and diverse other Testimonies which occurre in the Dominicans I shall rehearse the answers of severall men First Rada Par. prim controv triges Art 2. pag. 493. Adomnes authoritaies unica solutione sit satis Dico enim quod non intelligunt sancti omnia esse Deo secundum rem praesentia sed secundum esse objectivum cognitum omnia enim in seipso videt intuâ—tur Secondly Suarez gives the same answer but he explaines himselfe more fully The Fathers saith he speake by way of exaggeration to declare the perfection and exactnesse of that knowledge which God hath of things to come for he knowes them so distinctly and accurately with all their circumstances as if they did exist actually present This knowledge of them therefore is not so much abstractive as intuitive not so much prescience as science Thirdly D. Twisse De scientia media pag. 390. gives the same answer that Bradwardine did unto the like saying out of Boetius and Anselme above 200 yeares agoe to wit That all things are present unto God in esse volito as decreed by him sunt ei praesentia id est per suam insuperabilem immutabilem voluntatem praesentialiter determinata decreta certitudinaliter ut fiant futura And this you may see how he cleares both out of Austin and Gregory Fourthly Becanus gives another answer which I take to be the more satisfying And 't is that the scope of both Austin and Gregory is to shew That there is not such a prescience or fore knowledge in God as there is in us viz imperfect and conjecturall c. From your Testimonies I come to the examination of your Reasons M r GOODWIN NOR is it any wonder at all that there should be peace and a concurrence of judgement about such a poynt as this even between those who have many Irons of coâ—â—ention otherwise in the fire considering how obvious and neere at hand the truth herein is For 1. if foreknowledge were properly and formally in God then might Predestination Election Reprobation and many other things be properly and formally in him also in as much as these are in the Letter and propriety of them as competible unto him as foreknowledge Nor can there be any reason given for a difference But unpossible it is that there should be any plurality of things whatsoever in their distinct and proper natures and formalities in God the infinite simplicity of his Nature and being with open mouth gainsaying it IEANES YOur Argument with open mouth gainsayeth that which no body will affirme but is mute in the proofe of that which only will be called for to wit That whatsoever is properly and formally ascribed unto God is really distinguished from Gods Essence and his other attributes If you think I doe you any wrong by this censure reduce your Argument unto Categoricall Syllogismes and make the best of it you can Mr GOODWIN SEcondly if foreknowledge were properly or formally in God there should be
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