cause and head of our Election c. Answ Doubtless our Authour is frequently disposed to pretend amazement at my doings and yet without all peradventure when he never shakes or shivers at all Cum frigidus nullus obstruit praecordia sanguis He doth it without once changing colour for else 1. when I did but say that he gives out Faith and I might rather have said good works of all sorts to be the cause of Election for them in all his writings he rather delights to name than Faith he could have had no reason of complaining I specified not what kind of causes he took them to be I only said he took them to be causes And I trow he will grant me that Causa sine qua non or conditio sine qua non which even p. 39. whilest he disputes against me he grants Faith and good works to be of Election are in their kind to be reputed Causes 2. Whilest in the very next lines to the words which I have transcribed he doth out of § 55. of his Correct Copy quote it that good works are required as a necessary condition though very unworthy to be the cause of our Election 3. I will leave it to understanding Readers to judge whether this necessary condition which here he talks of amount not to somewhat more then a bare antecedent or a mere Causa sine qua non The rather because in other places he calls it the important coâ—â—â—tion without which Election cannot be had Nay that which p. 70. of his Correct Copy the very page which I had quoted against him makes the difference betwixt the Elect and Reprobate and that because as there he speaks as well as elsewhere those who are in Christ by faith are better then those who are out of Christ by infidelity who therefore are chosen when as others are left yea that without which it would be unjust for God to elect any man Correct Copy p. 71. Justification precedeth Election because no man is elected unless he differ from him that is rejected p. 69. Correct Copy whatsoever is justly decreed may be justly executed as it is decreed If he decreed to save any without regard or respect of their being such he might actually save them without respect to their being such So that â—e needed not so thrasonically to have boasted of his logical skill against me whom he looks upon and represents p. 63. as a meer ignaro in these matters to distinguish p. 63. betwixt the Cause propter quam res est for which a thing is and the necessary condition sine quâ non est without which it is not whilest in his own mentioned expressions he doth sufficiently confound them 3. Though he do very often times gull us as p. 70. Correct Copy Philanthrop Chap. p. 80. with good words that God makes the difference and crowns his own gifts in us c. yet how will it be possible for him to put any good sense upon these words who every where teacheth that these previous dispositions are precedent to Election that we are not choâ—en to Faith and good works and perseverance in them but that we are by Gods choosing foreseen to have them He likewise maintains Correct Copy p. 69. That God no otherwise executes his Decrees then he made them and ergo if in our first and eternal Election there were respect had to our faith good works and perseverance in them then suâ—e when in time he doth call us effectually Rom. 8. 28. which most Divines use to call our temporal Election from 1 Cor. 1. 26 27. he doth in like sort chuâ—e us for our Faith good works perseverance c. and all this sure will make them to be somewhat more then Causa sine qua non or conditio sine qua non even such things as being performed according to what the Judge requires do move his will to bestow Election as a reward upon us as I have told him that one of his dear Remonstrants speaks (a) Nic. Grevinchov contra Ames p. 24. Contendo naturae legum ac conditionum praescriptarum omninó conveniens esse ut voluntas Judicis à conditione postulatâ praestitâ moveatur ad praemium Just as the Massilians of old Prosper in Resp ad 8. dubium Genuens Ipsa Electorum Praedestinatio non est nisi retributio Et evidenter Faustus Lib. 2. Cap. 3. Praescientia gerenda praenoscit post modum praedestinatio retribuenda praescribit Illa praevidet merita haec praeordinat praemia praescientia ad potentiam praedestinatio ad justitiam pertinet Philanthr p. 66. Reprobation is said to be an act of Justice and good works c. are the important condition without which Election will not be had 4ly Who that observes how often in the Correct Copy and elsewhere Mr. T. P. doth consound the Decree of Election with the Decree of Salvation will believe that Mr. T. P. makes Faith and obedience c. only to be necessary prâ—cedents unto life and Salvation and that he doth not also take them to be Causes of Salvation if not directly meritorious yet in some more then ordinary way procuring and causing Salvation Mind the drift of his Discourse against the Solifidians Sinner Impleaded from p. 332. to 337. 5ly If he will maintain that there is any the least Analogy betwixt his Doctrines of Election and Reprobation then as every where he maintains sin to be the meritorious Cause of Reprobation what reason hath he to deny that Faith and obedience are the meritorious Causes of Election which is opposite to Reprobation 6ly Who can believe that all in haste Mr. T. P. will in heart differ whatsoever in words he may seem to do from what he doth after his fashion most solemnly quote out of Prosper Austin Melancthon (b) Phil. Chap. 3. p. 77 Saints whom for his own turn he will elsewhere be thought to adore who as he saith did all agree That Gods Predestination was accordâ—ng to foreknowledge so as he made some Vessels of honour and some of dishonour even for this cause because he foresaw their several ends of what wills they would be and what would be their actions under the assistance and help of grace Mark that Prosper in these words speaks neither his own or Austins sense but that of the Massilians or Semi-Pelagians Is there any thing in the genius of any of Mr. T. P's singular Doctrines which should move him to enter a dissent from these sayings § 2. As for what he adds of Christs being the means and the meritorious cause of our Election Answ There might be some reason to take some more then ordinary notice of it 1. If he had made it his business as well to have proved it as after Arminius and others to have dictated it 2. If he would have thought it worth the while to have confuted any of Dr. Twisse his large Discourses against it unto which I had about it referred him in my Corrept
thoâ—e his labouâ—s tending to those Subjects which hath been usefull and acceptable to them the whole reformed Church are concerned in it I find him still punctually observing his former expression viz. rejecting all the doctrines of Geneva in which besides the latitude there is this ambiguity whether it be meant according to Calvin or Beza for both were of Geneva between whom in some of these points there was the like difference as between Mr. Perkins and Bishop Abbot with us viz. in the Superlapsarian opinion with Beza was for but Calvin held it otherwise It had been better to haâ—e named the particuâ—ers than thus to cloud them in the Generalls The only point which he names here is That the Primat embraced the doctrine of universall redemption and saith in that he doth as good as say all He doth not assert it from his own knowledge but saith he hath it from many most unquestionable persons which had it poured into their ears by the Primates own mouth If it were in a Sermon of his at a Church in London the last he preached in that City and many months before his death which I am enformed by others is the sense of it I was present at it and with me there was no new thing observed to have been uttered by him differing from what his judgment was many years agone since I had the happinesse to be known unto him It may be some of these persons produced for witnesses being strangers to him and taking him to be of the other extremity might apprehend it as a retractation but they were much mistaken in it If they heard him affirming That by the death of Christ all men receive this benefit that they are savabiles or put into a capacity and possibility of saâ—vation That termes of peace are procured for all mankind That all mens sins are become pardonable mercy attainable in which state those of the Angeâ—icall nature which fell are not That there is some distinction to be made between his satisfaction rightly understood and his intercession according to that of our Saviour I pray for these I pray not for the world c. It is possible for ought I know some such expressions might be his then But that by this Universall Redemption should be understood such an Universall grace that the same measure of it without any distinction should equally and alike be conferred and applyed to Judas which was to Peter and that the only difference was the free-will of Peter in accepting without any further cause of thanks to God for his grace in inclining him accordingly c. This I suppose will not be attested to have been professed by him either in this or any other Sermon or private conference with him And in this present inlargement I would not be understood to interpose my self in the controversie or to affix thus much upon Mr. Piercyes Judgment but only to averre that the Primate at his last in this particular differed not from what he had declared formerly That which he saith is the summe of what he had sayed viz. That the reverend Primate did conforme his judgment to all the fathers of the Church for the first four Centuries after Christ This he might averre without any relation to these poynts in controversie it being the terme or thereabouts which he accepts of in his answer to the Jesuit Malones Challenge in the justifying or condemning those twelve points of controversie between us and the Church of Rome of which one concerning Freewill is of this fraeternity What the Primates judgment was of that is sufficiently declared there and he continued in the same without any change the last time I saw him by the discourse I had then with him of it and St. Augustine unlesse we be over strict may be admitted within that compasse being accounted by the Primate at the time when he was consecrated a Bishop to be but in Anno 410. as Prosper reckons his death but in 433. being then of age 76. Before whose time these poynts were never discussed by the Fathers at large singly nor determined by them joyntly in any Councill which Pelagius gave the first occasion of and t is known that the doctrine of St. Augustine against him is inclined unto and defended by the Primate in his workes And to say no more the Articles of Religion Agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops Bisheps and the rest of the Clergy of Ireland in the Convocation holden at Dublin Anno 1615. which fully determine and declare all those poynts accordingly he had then the honour to be appoynted by the Synode as a principall person to draw them up Now the last time that I saw him which was after that pretended Testimony of the witnesses of his change either in publique or private he did fully confirme and commend that to me to be heeded and observed by me as the summary of his judgment in those and other subjects of which I have said somewhat more elsewhere That of Mr. Piercyes drawing in more to bear him company viz. King James Bishop Andrews Melancthon in their châ—nges also for the better as he is pleased to determine doth not concern me to take notice of only if he have found it under their hands as their last will and Testament in their workes he shall but Charitably erre to use his own words if he shouâ—d be mistaken but no such matter appears here is to the Primate In a word I cannot but professe my restect to Mr. Pierce both for his own worth as the great esteem which in this postscript morethen in his former book he â—ath expressed of this Eminent Primate can easily believe he would account it a reputation to his opinion that his might patronize it by the great esteem had of him in all parts of the reformed Church both for his learning and piety and I have so much Charity as to believe that this error is more to be imputed to his informers then himself and if I were known to him I would advise him not to infist any farther in it it being by these several circumstances so improbable but according to his own ingenuous offer to make an ample satisfaction and what he hath so highly extolled in the Primate to have been his glory and honour in preferring truth before error in that his suppoâ—ed imaginary retractation I may without offence return the application to himself which with all prudent men will be much more his own commendation and though according to his profession he be innocent as to any voluntary injury thinking he did God and him good service yet it being a wrong in it self will deserve some Apology And indeed it will be hard for any prudent impartiall man to believe that what the Primate upon mature deliberation and long study for so many years had professed in the Pulpit and at the presse he should be so soon shaken in mind as without any convincing force of argument from any other
be and what their actions 5ly As for future morall good things especially such as accompany Salvation such as are effectual vocation justification sanctification c. he eternally foresaw they would be in his Own because he did from eternity resolve or decree to bestow them graciously upon his own 1 Tim. 3. 9. But as for future moral evil things whether original or actual sins God foreknew them all in the same moment of eternity because even then he did by his permissive and ordinative will determine that they should fall out Act. 2. 23. 4. 28. (c) Carthus Lib. 1. disc 40. qu. 3. p. 580. q. 3. p. 580. vide Aquin. Part. 1. qu. 23. Art 3. Bonum subjacet providentiae divinae tanquam ordinatum causatum ab eâ ideò praedestinatio est causa Gratiae Gloriae sed quoniam malum culpae non subjacet providentiae Divinae ut intentum causatum sed solum tanquam praescitum ordinatum hinc reprobatio est The sum then is we do not first in any moment of time deny Gods Omniscience and Praescience only we make them not as to the determinate futurition of any thing as we conceive matters antecedent to Gods Decrees but either Concomitant or at most in the same moments of time and nature subordinate 2ly We do not as the learned Bishop of Salisbury well observes deny praescience in the matter of Praedestination of either good or bad actions only we deny an Arminian praescience (d) Solum praescientia culpae non paenae Davant p. 25. 45. sed praecipue p. 153. of such actions foreseen in men as caused or preceded the different decrees of God in electing some men mercifully unto salvation and leaving others through their own default to plunge themselves into eternal damnation We grant it is not only untrue but unpossible that God should decree the salvation of any man without the foresight of those acts viz. of faith perseverance c. We deny not the foresight of faith and perseverance in the Catholick sense and the like sure in point of Reprobation may be said of persevering in infidelity that is of effects and Consequents of divine Praedestination or Election but in the Arminian sense that is as of antecedent motives reasons causes or conditions foreseen in men and drawing after them the Decree of Predestination Whether this determination of his long Question will please him yea or no I know not if he like it not as learned enough let him take heed lest he meet not with one which is more rash but not so soâ—â—nd (e) Consilium Dei velle nosse multorum est nosse autem vel paucisâ—imorum hominum vel omnino nullorum Aâ—gust lib. 2. opier Imp. Contra Jut f. 346. I may justly fear how much soever as yet he will seem to be for an eternal Praescience of all things yet if he do but go on to hugg his beloved S. Episcopius f as he hath begun to do Mr. T. P. his principles will quickly prompt him much better to like of that which Episcopius sets down (g) Episcopius disp 4. Thes 10. Et si non negemus Deo scientiam futurorum attribui posse imprimis quia eam Scriptura Deo tribuere passim videtur tamen an necessarium scâ—â—u sit ad hoc ut Deus colatur ejusmodi scientiam Dâ—o competere examinari permiâ—â—imus An cognoscat Deus possibilia an infinita absoluâ—e necessarium scitu non credimus Though we do not deny but that the Science of future contingent things may be attributed to God especially because the Scripture doth up and down seem to ascribe it to God yet whether it be necessary to be known for this end that God may be worshipped that such a knowledge doth belong to God we permit it to be examined Whether God know possible things infinite things we do not believe to be absolutely necessary to be known 6th He saith p. 6. That I do betray a third fort of weakness c. for that as he saith I know that he doth as much as any assert eternal Praedestination only I prove it against him to be respective of final impenitence in all that shall be damned Answ 1. How I could so much as divine that he should assert eternal Praedestination I cannot tell when as the face and true Genius of his opinion looks quite another way and when but once if once he had in his Correct Copy so much as mentioned the word Eternall and that only in the matter of praescience and not in the matter of Predestination or Predetermination which are acts of Gods will as the former is of his knowledge 2. It is not to him or to any man in the World conceiveable or explicable how an eternal immanent Act of Gods Counsel should be founded upon the temporal Act of the free will of a versatile Creature and yet such is the Act of final impenitence elicited by the wicked free will of a Reprobate or of him that shall be damned 3dly He expresseth himself that he may the more easily deceive unwary souls in too mild a manner when he saith that the Decree of Reprobation hath respect unto finall impenitence as if by that terme in shew harmless he did only understand that it were nudum antecedens whâ—reas it is plain by all the Discourses elsewhere against the distinction of positive and Negative Reprobation he understands by respect a meritorious Cause such as abaeterno moves the will of God to make his Decree of Reprobation And the like fallacy lurks in the same word Respective which he by and by applyeth to the Decree of Election and which requires Faith Repentance and Perseverance to the end in all of ripe age which some where (b) Sinner impleaded he calls the Important Conditions of Election and by which as one of his beloved Remonstrants (c) Vic. Grevin chov Contra Ames p. 24. whom he hath reason as much to hugg as he doth his Associate S. Episcopius (d) Philanthr Chap. 4. p. 14. well expresseth Mr. T. P. his true sense Voluntas judicis à conditione postulata et praestita movetur ad praemium à neglectâ aut repudiatâ— ad poenâ—us idque contendit conveniens esse naturae legum ac conditionum praescriptarum i. e. by which the will of the judge is moved to confer a Reward or infer a punishment by vertue of a Condition required and performed and that in congruity to the nature of Lawes and Conditions prescribed 4ly Why should I have any the least reason to suspect that Mr. T P. by virtue of any of his principles which are all but borrowed from Arminius or from men of that stamp should be any better able to maintaine Eternal Reprobation and then not eternal Election neither and then not sure Eternal predestâ—nation than his Reverend Father Arminius himselfe who professeth it (e) J. Armin. in Examin Perkinâ— de â—lectione Sect. 14. Certum autem
obstinate Jesuitical Reâ—ractories Thirdly there is nothing so familiar with Mr. T. P. as to retract Austins Retractations and to maintain that his first Writings are to be preferred above his latter that about the matters in debate betwixt him and the Pelagians he and they must be judged by the Fathers before him who all as I have told him say little or nothing and could say as little as may be in these matters (f) Pbil. 76. 78. c. p. 10. c. alibi Ante Pelagium exortum seourius loquebantur Patres Fourthly To an Objection of mine set down in my Corrept Correct p. 186. of his mistaking of Pelagius his words which he had set down instead of Austins Correct Copy p. 44. and against which saying Austin disputes in no lesse then a whole Chapter and beyond it he Answers not a wise word but passeth it wholly over in silence Fifthly Phil. p. 8. he delivers it peremptorily that St. Austin was a Bishop when he wrote to Simplician Answ 1. Bellarmine as great an Antiquary as Mr. T. P. delivers the contrary viz. that he wrote to him whilest he was a Novice Lib. 2. de grat Lib. Arbitrâ—o Cap. 15. S. August cum scripsit Libros ad Simplicianum adhuc juvenis erat neque multa invenerat in hac difficillima quaestione quae postea majori diligentia investigavit 2. Austin speaking of this Writing himself saith indeed that it was wrote initio Episcopatus sui but withall he saith that it was done antequam Pelagiana haeresis appareret indeed in the beginning of his Epâ—scopacy but before the apparition of the Pelagian Heresie (g) August de bono persever Cap. 21. 3. Let it have been wrote when it will there is nothing so manifest but that as I have proved Corrept Correct p. 186. and could do if need were by many more proofs Austin hath retracted several places of what he wrote ad Simplicianum But so much the fitter for Mr. T. P's palate who learns out of Austin ordine retrogrado by going backwards Tres mihi convivae prope dissentire videntur Poscentes vario multum diversa Palato § 4. After all this is any body likely to be moved by what he sets down Chap. 3. Phil. 83 where he sets the best legg forward in commendation of special Grace A trick which for any thing I know to the contrary he may have learned from the often-named Dogmatical Predecessors of his whose way it was ever to give Grace good words when they were any thing hard put to it by tâ—eir adversaries (a) See Corrept Correct p. 38. Hil. ad August se abominari damnari testabantur Massilienses si quis quicquam virium in aliquo remansisse quoad sanitatem progredi posset existimaret for else who that hath read any of his other Writings or what he hath up and down in this p. 19. p. 22. c. especially p. 19. 22. can without infatuation believe that there is any more agreement betwixt the sâ—eming good words which he gives here and the real bad meanings which he doth express elsewhere then there is betwixt Harp and Harrow First Here we have Jesus Christ and all other Graces in Him all given by God by a certain absolute gracious Decree all if we may believe him and can understand things not to be understood sallying out of the Conditional Decree of Predestination founded upon praescience of what we should believe or disbelieve practâ—se or leave unpractised but this is nothing but to peak Daggers and desperate Contradictions The true opening of this grand Mystery any way looking towards a reconciliation of these otherwise irreconcileables is that he must say with his Brethren the (a) J. Armin. Exposit on Rom. 9. Acta Synod Remonstrant Artic. 1. Deus constituere voluit Mediatorem qui pro peccatoribus omnibus moreretur sic Jus acquireret ad salutem vitam câ—rta lege isdem conferrendi Decrevit Deus ut omnes illi qui in illum Redemptorem crederent credentes ad finem perseverarent servarentur alii veró damnarentur Arminians either first that Gods decree of giving Jesus Christ and all other graces in him was absolute because it was by vertue of his Counsel and Will alone upon what Conditions whether of legall obedience or of Evangelical faith and obedience he would bestow all Graces Or 2ly rather as Mr. T. P. in a true genuine manuscript of his expresseth himself Gods Decree is absolute because p. 6. of the Ms. He chose us to be all visible members of his Church by an absolute Election he absolutely and of free Grace called us to the means of salvation I will leave it to any good Christian Conscience to judge whether that deserve to be called an absolute certain gracious Decree whereby the means of Grace are indeed made certain c. but the Grace to be obtained by those means is left uncertain for so he saith in the very next words of that M. S. he chose few of those visible members to be mystical members of his Church by conditional Election Secondly Here we have as he saith pleading for special Grace properly Grace because gratuâ—tous and free c. whereas elsewhere as we have abundantly seen First all is suspended upon the motions of mans free will That must be the Concausa the social cause with â—race if not as in true reckoning it will be found to be at last the Primum mobile the first mover p. 19. It is the liberty of the Will and the Cooperation of Grace as the Sword of God and Gideon 2. Elsewhere as at large he diâ—putes it out (b) Sinner impleaded p. 251. c. If it did not lie in the believers power to live like an Infidel whâ—ch we find by daily and sad experience and in the power of an Infidel by the assistance of Grace to turn belâ—ever the fâ—rmer could not be punished for Apostâ—cy nor the latter for obduration and as by his quoting here of Math. 13. 12. habenti dabitur according to his and the Arminian way of understanding that noted Scripture all this free special Grace depends upon mâ—ns good husbanding of his Talent which all â—en have received by recâ—iving of their natures for so do both they and the Massilians explain this matter (c) Prosper excerpt à Gensen Ideo ipsos fidem ad Deum retulisse quia ab ipsa sit creata natura cui rationabilem inseruiâ— voluntatem per quam unusquisque credere non credere in sua habeat potestate Sic Massil in Epist Hilar ad August Nec de hac fide posse dici quid habes quod non accepisti Cum in eadem natura remanserit licet vitiata quae prius sana ac perfecta donata sit Et in alio ibid. Loco Consequens put ant exhibendam ab co fidem cujus natura id voluntate Conditoris concâ—ssum est It is with them forâ—ooth
Corrept Correct p. 56. and divers more which D. Reynolds had quored in his Epistle p. 5. in a meer literal sense when as yet first in my Corrept Correct p. 69. 70. I had expresly told him that that saying of mine out of D. Ames Sensus Scripturae est tantum unicus isque Grammaticus holds not alwayes but only then when the Letter is not plainly metaphorical typical or contrary to other more plain places and the clear Analogy of faith And sure I take it to be against the two latter for to maintain God to be the Authour of sin or as he most maliciously and hatefully expresseth me the Fountain or cause of sin 2. It is plain to any who doth but list to take notice how I explain the places formerly mentioned whensoever I touch upon them that I do not take the most of them in a mere Grammatical and literal sense but in a figurative for whereas God according to the Letter of many of those Texts seems to be made a moral cause of sin as sin I do every where make it evidenâ— that I do only believe God to be a natural Cause of the mere act of sin (a) Dominicus à Soto de Nat. Grat. lib. 1. cap. 18. Quamvis permulti sint quibus non sit explicatu facile quo modo in odio Dei quod internam habet indivisam malignitatem posset Deus causam esse entitatis culpae vero non item non tamen est ita intellectu difficile In moralibus inquit ille prorsus est verò judicaturque causa qui lege ope consilio favore vel persuasu movet quempiam sive ad bonum sive ad malum At que his modis rationibus universos Deus movet ad bonum honestum neminem autem ad malum without which it is impossible that any sin can be committed but that he is only a mere accidental Cause of the obliquity of the act of sin wherein alone the formality of sin is consisting and from whence alone sin's denomination ought to be taken Thirdly I had just reason for bestowing some sound Correptory Correction on him and by many Arguments from Corrept Correct p. 84. to 86. to correct him for his receding too far from the literal sense of the fore-quoted Scriptures whilest as may be seen in his 14 15 16. pages of his Correct Copy and set down out of it by me Corrept Correct p. 83. unto all which he is as mute as a Fish he will not have them to allow of God's so much as permitting sin but in an equitable sense and that is as it signifies not to hinder by main force and that he disposes and orders them to the best advantage And yet never first will he or any body else by the help of his Melancthon and I cannot tell who besides whom he mentions p. 26. be ever able to prove that the Scripture-phrases of hardning of mens hearts of giving them over to their own hearts lusts of blinding their eyes c. as they are paenal acts of the Almighty can by so soft interpretations be put off Secondly Nothing hath been so usual to the men of his way I mean the Arminians as under colour of receding a little from the Letter of several Texts which in Rom. 9. 11. 18. Phil. 2. 13. Heb. 8. 10. 10. 16. and elsewhere make against them to overthrow all at once both the Letter and the true meaning of the Scriptures And some reason I had to be jealous of Mr. T. P. this way Fourthly Though I have in many places of my Correptory already shewed and shall be forced again else-where to do in what sense I maintain God efficaciously to permit sin viz. only in such a sense as renders God free from all guilt of sin is no way destructive to sinful mans Liberty when he sins and so makes him the only Delinquent yet I shall think it fitting once for all in the margin (b) Thes Salvian de providentiâ Dei in mal pag. 186. Praeter nudam permissionem esse aliquam Dei efficaciam in perpetratione mali contendunt alii alii negant acerrimè Illine quid Divinâ providentiá subtrahant aut eam in rerum humanarum procuratione negligentius versari dicant quà m admirabilem Dei sapientiam decet hinc Deo labem aliquam aspergant quasi esset auctor peccati utrique metuentes ne in scopulum aliquem incurrant Certè uti natura Dei à peccato abhorret summoperè alienos nos esse ab eá sententia quae Deum peccati causam statuit juxta oportet Verum haud facilè quicquam Deo indignius dici potest quà m ut vel conniventibus oculis omnia temerè ferri patiatur vel omnia inspectare dicatur quidem veruntamen brachiis quasi complicatis otiose torpere putetur quasi eo sese abdicârit imperio quod in Creaturarum ratione praeditarum facultates obtinet à naturâ Neque enim consentaneum est ut imperium illud peccato Diaboli hominum perdiderit neque ut id amplius exercere non possit immunis à labe Equidem non negaverim aliquibus in locis Scripturae Sacrae verba quae efficientiam Deo tribuere in eo genere videntur sic esse interpretanda ut facere dicatur quod non impedit quia solus id impedire potest veluti cum indurare hominum cerda dicitur quia non emollit ut Hebraicè vivificare dicitur is qui non occidit Quae est alicubi Augustini sententia At ut taceamus negationem illam actionis quâ sola indurationem impedire valuit esse ab aliquo Justo Judicio plurima loca sunt in quibus Scriptura magis emphaticè loquitur quà m ut ad solam permissionem revocari possint Scilicet cum Deus magnopere Iratus Davidi fore denunciat ut quod flagitium clanculum admisit id in apertâ luce adeoque in conspectu Solis vindicet putandumne est eum nihil aliud sibi velle quà m ut Absalomi nesarios coâ—atus non reprimat sinatque furere intemperanteâ— Aut cum Joseph negat alius quà m Dei ipsius operâ factum esse ut in Aegyptum descenderet nihil ne significat praeterquam quod non impedivit quominus venderetur Sonant sane illa verba aliquid amplius Istud verò quod nihil neque Judaei neque Judas in proditione crucifixione Christi fâ—cerunt quam quod Dei confilium atque manus factum iri decreverat non nisi admodum frigide dilutè sic tamen T. P. p. 9. alibi passim de nuda permissione explicari potest Aug. Lib. de praedestinat Gratiâ cap. 4. 2 Sam. 12. 11. Gen. 45. 8. Act. 4. 28. Huc accedit quod si Deus in eo genere efficit vitari quidem non possit quin mala perpetrentur haud enim aliter Creatura corrupta in peccatum ruit quà m ut aqua sponte naturá fluit
he hath so far out-stripped me as the most artificial and Elegant scold ever did the most pewling Smatterer in a Tongue-Combate Laureâ tu dignus § 8. An Answer to any thing that is Dogmatically material in his 3d Chapter to his Sect. 6. p. 61. § 1. THat I make God to be worse than the Devil himself p. 10. quoting my 24. page where he knowes as well as I that there are no such words in all my page 2. That what I say of Gods being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is only inferred from that Doctrine which I resist and he defendeth Answ 1. I do not say absolutely that he saith so but that upon supposition of an absolute Decree which elsewhere I prove must needs be so (a) Correpâ— Correct 139 140 141. he is not ashamed so to speak both in his p. 24. and in his p. 41. 13. Correct Copy and that he thus speaks by way of inference he dares not here deny Secondâ—y He takes no notice of what I have divers times told him (b) P. 64. 70. p. 72. 182. c. that whilest he makes no proofs that either in Terminis his Adversaries do speak thus or that by any lawful Consequences they must speak thus These blasphemous speeches are rather his who utters them than his Adversaries who abhorr the thoughts of them more than he doth 1. In what a lamentable case is my Declamator if he be now observed to say p. 115. That punishment must needs be decreed before the permission of sin And p. 87 That God is the determiner not only of all things and actions but of their several modalities too c. Answ 1. If any body will but be pleased to turn to the words of my Corrept p. 115. 116. He will there find that with Dr. Twisse I do conclude the Decrees of Gods permitting of sin and of his damning for sin not to be subordinate but coordinate insomuch as that I say no rational Creature either noble or ignoble did ever in time suffer so much as to the cutting of his finger but for sin nor did God ever entertain any thoughts that he should suffer for any thing else Secondly it may be in the same place as plainly seen that what I speak of punishments being decreed before the permission of sin is only spoken by way of opposition to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Divinity with which p. 23. of his Correct Copy he had made himself so merry and upon the supposition of some that damnation of the Creature is the supreme end of Gods intention which upon the place I dispute against 3. If any body will but yield to what I say p. 86. 87. and if he yield not to it to the Authority by which I back it in the Margin he is worse than distracted that God doth not only determine all things and actions but their several modalities too as to the manner of their being whether as necessary contingent or voluntary then he will not shew himself a lamentable Declamator it were pitty so egregious an Orator as himself is known to be should so sowly stumble but which is worse he will prove himself to be a most woful Calumniator whilest he would insinuate that by holding this principle I must needs maintain God to be the Author of sin whereas any learned and sober Reader will easily conclude that I must needs maintain the contrary viz. that if God determined modalities as well as things that then he did determine that sin should be by him permitted to fall out by the contingent voluntary sinful will of the Creature but not at all by the sinful will of the Creator § 9. To his § 2. p. 56. which I had almost forgotten That I allow no other will to God then a Hypothetical one p. 4. yet he knowes on the contrary that he neither doth nor can show any one passage in my notes where I deny that God Almighty hath as well an absolute as a conditional will Answ First I spake that only by the by in that place and therefore no great matter should have been made of it 2. By any understanding man I must needs be understood to speak it in reference to the Decrees of Election and Reprobation which every body knowes that ever hath read him he maintains only to be conditional and not at all to be absolute so that if here or as again he doth Chap. 4. p. 2. he should talk of never so many absolute Decrees of God yet every body would see that he doth vagari extra oleas speak nothing to the main purpose 3. It is most observable that where he speaks most distinctly about Gods absolute Decrees as he doth Philanth Chap. 4. p. 2. he sets not down any one absolute Decree by which the Lord determined to give Faith or Repentance unto any but that he is absolute in this that he will proceed by the Rule of rewarding if we will obey and of punishing if we will not 4. By what he doth even in this Section refer us unto in Correct Copy p. 49. p. 52. and by what he disputes up and down about Gods antecedent and consequent will there is nothing so plain but that Gods absolute will which he and his Arminians with him call his Consequent will is grounded upon his Hypothetical and so if a man could tell how to believe it his will is but hypothetically absolute 5. Chap. 4. p. 2. He grants Gods Decree of Creation to have been absolute but he will no where grant God when he decreed to create Man to have resolved for what end he would make him God and Nature use to make nothing in vain but according to this mans goodly Divinity God decreed to make one of the chiefest of his Creatures before he had resolved upon the Cui bone He is extremely angry with Calvin Correct Copy p. 24. for having said that God foreknew what end man should have before he made him and dâ—d therefore foreknow it because by his decree he had so ordained it (a) The words which Mr. T. P. finds fault with are these Lib. 3. Instit Cap. 23. §. 7. Decretum quidem horribile fateor infieiari tamen nemo potest quin praesciverit Deus quem exitum esset habiturus homo antequam ipsum conderet ideo praesciverat quia Decreto suo sic ordinaverat § 10. To his 9th Section p. 62 63. § 1. That in my seventy page I give out Faith and Infidelity to be the causes of Election and Reprobation p. 15. Still my amazement growes more and more that any man even in print should speak so clearly against his knowledge and contradict his own eyes and the eyes of as many as ever have or shall read me for there is not any such word in all that page which he citeth or in any other which he citeth not In the page which he citeth I say that Christ is the means the meritorious
Correct p. 227. (c) D. Twiss vindic Lib. de electione Digress 1. 2da c. à p. 151. ad 178. 3. If it were not apparently absurd to talk of means of Election Election being by vertue of one entire absolute eternal Decree of God which comprehends in it both end and meanes 4. Were it not so that Jesus Christ himself considered as Mediator were not himself predestinated and elected to be the head of the Elect and so no Elector or means of Election Rom. 3. 25. § 3. p. 64. 1. 11 12. I had never so little Logick as to say that any thing in man which is the Object could be the cause of Gods Decree but that man is the cause of his sin and of his punishment Answ 1. Why then hath he hitherto every where so fiercely pleaded for conditional Decrees of Reprobation grounded on or at least occasioned by sin as the conditio sine qua non the necessary the important condition which in this case is tantamount ' with a cause of the Decree 2. Why did he but just now tell us p. 63. That Christ is the meritorious cause of Election and what is Election but Gods eternal internal immanent Decree appointing some to obtain grace and glory 3. Doth he not know that if he were candid in this acknowledgement that then all Disputes betwixt him and the men he contends against would be ended who none of them all doubt but sin is the cause of the Execution of the Decree of Reprobation though it be not the cause of the Decree it self that Man is the cause of his sin and of his punishment too as here he himself doth speak That though Christ be not the meritorious cause of Election yet he is the meritorious cause of Salvation and of all those spiritual blessings which we are chosen or elected to (a) Dr. Ames no Arminian sure cites this out of Bellarmine with approbation save that he saith Tollantur merita nihil erit reprehensione dignum in hac distinctione prout à Bell usurpatur Ames Anti-Synod Dordrac Cap. 1. p. 15. Bellarmin's distinction in de Grat. et Lib. Arbitr Lib. 2. Cap. 14. Electio aeterna duobus modis considerari potest uno modo ut est intentio dandi gloriam alie modo ut est dispositio executionis quasi exequutio in mente divina Nam priori modo Electio est mere gratuita nullam praerequirit praevisionem operum bonorum Posteriori modo praeexigit praevisionem meritorum Non enim vitam aeternam sub ratione praemii Deus dare disposuit nisi eis quos bene operaturos esse praevidit Gloria in genere causae finalis prior est bouis operibus in genere autem causae effisientis priora sunt bona Opera quà m Gloria 4. Need he once more be shewed how that by this saying he hath given his Correct Copy and now this pretty Philanthropy of his a fair fall upon their backs Corrept Correct p. 144 145. The force of truth is often such as that it wrings a Confession from its otherwise most stubborn opposers § 8. 64. § 3. In his p. 121. he saith he knowes not any one either of the ancient or modern Orthodox Writers who will not readily yield that God did not absolutely decree the Reprobation positive of any Creature but upon praescience and supposition of wilful Rebellion and impenitence I will now take him at his word he is as perfect an Arminian as I have ever heard speak or else he confesseth he is not Orthodox In these few words he hath ruined himself and his cause for ever unless he will say that he is my Convert and the best of his Book a long impertinence he cannot escape by any service c. Mr. T. P. goes on tryumphing over me more or lesse to p. 68. Answ 1. It hath used to be said that Lapsus linguae non est error mentis the trip of a mans tongue is no error of his mind Claudius that dull and lasie Emperor catched not more at flies then this Gentleman doth at unwary syllables yet he hath not so much as discovered wherein the stumbles or trippings of my Phrases lye By what I do in that very p. 121. oppoâ—e in him which did confound Reprobation and damnation and much more by what Corrept Correct p. 113. and elsewhere I had distinctly set down my meaning was sufficiently expressed viz. that considering two things in Gods Decrees First actum volentis Dei the act of Gods Decree or the intention in it self considered Secondly rem decretam the thing decreed or the will to execute that Decree that the former is not grounded upon Praescience of any wilful Rebellion but that the latter is of which alone as is plain I speak in my Text p. 121. and my meaning is much the same with that which but just now I expressed out of Ames and Bellarmine 2. If the saying of this can make me as very an Arminian as ever he heard speak I dare be bold to say that as great Anti-Arminians as ever I heard of or ever set pen to paper have spoken as much I shall not need at large to quote Doctor Davenant Dr. Walaeus Dr. Rivet (a) Dr. Walaeus Contra Corvin in Quarto p. 30. 152. Bishop Davn. Animadvers p. 42 43 111. imò passim A. Rivet Disputat quintâ de Reprobatione Thes 8 9. c. Paulus Ferius a professed Supralapsarian Schol Orth. Cap. 28. Voluit quidem Deus non bealificare Judam sine ullo respectu peccati tamen non habuit voluntatem infligendi poenam nisi propter peccata quae in eo praevidit nay all the Sublapsarians who speak full out as high as this comes to and yet never commenced Arminian Doctors but let me only in the Margin refer him to multitudes of places out of Dr. Twisse (b) Doctor Twisse vindâ—c Lib. 1. p. 100. Certissimum est nobis Deum decrevisse ut non nisi nolentes atque impii perderentur verum hoc subjungimus hinc tantum sequi impietatem causam esse perditionis non autem decreti sive constitutionis divinae In eandem sententiam saepissime p. 332. Col. 2. Lib. 2. p. 11. col 2. Epist Dedic ad Reg. Bohem. p. 4. Lib. 1. 83. 99. and I dare be bold to say in a 100. places more c. and for the behoof of the English Reader I shall transcribe some few signal passages out of Dr. Twisse in his Answer to the Synod of Dort and Arles reduced to practise And very hard it will be for Mr. T. P. to prove Dr. Twisse to be an Arminian and yet to his sayings he must consent if he will not prove himself to say that any thing in man which is the Object can be the cause of Gods Decree p. 64. Dr. Twisse Synod of Dort and Arles p. 10 11. God did decree to damn no man but for sin is the unanimous consent of all our Divines
c. And accordingly Tilenus himself when he was on our side took exception against Arminius his stating the Decree of Predestination and Reprobation according to our Opinion to proceed citra omnem considerationem resipiscentiae sidei in illis an t impentitentiae infidelitatis in hisce i. e. without all consideration of Repentance and Faith in those or of impenitence and infidelity in these And this that Rev. Dr. further proves p. 11. out of Piscator and out of the Contra-Remonstrants in the Conference at the Hague c. So opposing his Adversary p. 38. and 39. he had these words Secondly He aggravates it by the circumstance of the least consideration of sin which we are said to deny to have place in Reprobation whereas Divine consideration hath no degrees at all whereby it may be capable of greater or lesse a fair answer to what Mr. T. P. hath p. 6. Sin hath degrees in man but Divine consideration hath no degrees at all To come nearer to the point to discover their jugling in stating our Tenet most calumniously Consider I pray do any of our Divines maintain that God did ordain to dimn any man but for sin and by positive Reprobation in my p. 121. I meant nothing or could mean nothing but damnation It is apparent they do not all acknowledging that like as God doth damn no man but for sin so doth he ordain to damn no man but for sin And a little after to add one thing more not for their sin which they sinnedin Adam only but for those very actual sins and transgressions which they are guilty of And if any thing can be spoken yet more plainly in the same Book p. 40 41. having spoken of Election he speaks thus about the decree of Reprobation The like distinction is considerable on the part of Reprobation which also is the will of God in a certain kind I say we must distinguish in this Decree the act of Gods decreeing and the things decreed by him And these things are of a different nature and so different that look what alone is the cause of the act that alone is the cause of one thing decreed by it but not so of the other As for example the things denyed by Reprobation are 1. The denyal of Grace 2. The denyal of glory together with the inflicting of damnation As touching the first of these look what is the cause of Reprobation as touching the act of God reprobating that and that alone is the cause of the denyal of Grace viz. that of Faith and Repentance to wit the mere pleasure of God But as touching the denyal of glory and inflicting of damnation God doth not proceed according to the mere pleasure of his will but according to a Law which is this whosoever believeth not shall be damned And albeit God made that Law according to the mere pleasure of his will yet no wise man will say that God denies glory and inflicteth damnation on men according to the mere pleasure of his will the case being clear that God denies the one and inflicts the other merely for their sins who are thus dealt withall Thus far that great Arminian Maule Dr. Twisse unto all which as a signal conclusion let that noted place be added Vind c. Lib. 2. p. 75. Nunquam mihi contigit incidere in quempiam è nostris asserentem impios Creatos esse ad gloriam Divinae Justitiae in eorum suppliciis demonstrandam ob dcretum Dei sed signanter hoc fieri passim profitentur ob peccata ipsorum impiorum non quod peccata impiorum dicant esse causam creationis sed quod peccata hominum tam in executione quà m in intentione Dei constituant causam damnationis ipsorum c. § 4. As for what he subjoynes next p. 65. against the distinction betwixt Reprobation Positive and Negative there is no real difference betwixt not choosing and refusing or betwixt not saving and damning in Gods Decree c. Answ 1. I trust Mr. T. P. notwithstanding all the many Proselytes which he glories his Correct Copy to have gained him (a) Phil. Chap. 3. p. 55. is not become so absolute a Dictator in the Church as to be able by some few scrats of his pen to overthrow a distinction so solemnly and so long received as I could show if need were at large this to have bin by Austin by multitudes of Schoolmen one of which is not afraid to question any mans prudence who shall deny so plain a thing (b) Pennot Lib. 7. §. 10. Quis tam imprudens qui dicat voluntatem excludendi efficaciter aliquem à fine voluntatem permittendi illum pro sua libertate deficere à fine non esse voluntates distinctas by his beloved Arminius himself or by all sorts of Neotericks Secondly Though in Gods decrees who is purus putus actus there be no multiplicity of acts one succeeding the other as in men yet ex parte rei and to us poor mortalls there must needs as to the matter be conceived as great a distinction betwixt these two as there would be betwixt an Earthly Judges leaving a Prisoner in Goal or not preferring of him at Court and his adjudging of him to the Gallowes for his fellonie § 5. As for the tedious Dilemma with which in the same page 65. he would fain gravel me upon occasion of what I had wrote p. 197. in defence of Calvin A. 1. Any wise body will easily perceive that none but a very absurd man would have put it seeing in that place I have no occasion at all nor do not make any the least use of the distinction betwixt Reprobation positive and Reprobation negative only I have occasion to distinguish Gods eternal Reprobation from the first Adams and the Angels temporal Apostacy And of the first I say with Calvin that Gods secret will was the sole cause but of the latter that Adam and the Angels sinful wilâ—s were the cause See Calvin de praedest p. 711. 2. Any body if he will but turn to what I wrote Corrept Correct p. 195 196. in defence of Calvin will easily discover Mr. T. P's unreasonable thriftiness in sparing to give any Answer to no lesse then four of my Replies against what he had said against Calvin and in nibling only a little at the fifth by the intrusion of a most unseasonable Dilemma for the making whereof here there was no other occasion given him then what he was pleased to take from his own working wormish fancy 3. Seeing Mr. Calvin whensoever he hath occasion to speak of Gods Decree of leaving Angels or the first Adam to themselves so as not to have decreed them that efficacious Grace by which they would certainly have preserved themselves from falling and did only afford them that sufficient Grace by which they might have stood if they had so willed the Lord gave them only posse stare vel non peccare si vellent